It is a deeply painful thing to finally admit that the government you thought was your protector and friend is anything but. Or that the politicians charged with upholding the U.S. Constitution - as their oaths dictate by law - not only ignore this nonnegotiable mandate but actually diminish it with conflicting legislation that is largely illegal according to the constructs of America's republic under the rule of common law.

The common law I refer to is informed by the Magna Carta, which developed around two core principles that provide the litmus test for all legislation: (1) Do all you have agreed to do (contract law), and (2) Do no harm to another or his property (criminal law).

All kinds of statutes, administrative procedure, and highly arbitrary regulations have been passed via hidden legislation among hundreds of thousands of pages of bills, approved but not even read by our lawmakers, that do not remotely conform to the above two principles. How many statutes and regulations are adjudicated in criminal and/or civil court without harm to another or another's property? Most adjudication today is nothing more than a means for government and attorneys to generate revenue in the form of penalties and fees for an exhaustive list of contrived violations that harm no one.

Do any of us really believe it is a coincidence that Congress and the president are fast-tracking specific legislation and executive orders that, when viewed in their entirety, destroy the Bill of Rights? Three months ago, Congress passed the alarming National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), allowing indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without due process - meaning without probable cause, criminal charge, benefit of counsel, or a trial. This treatment of U.S. citizens was outlawed after the Civil War, only to resurface now in an even more egregious manner, especially since back then, citizens had to at least be charged with a crime.

In the shadow of this shocking legislation, last week Congress almost unanimously passed another horrifying law that criminalizes protesting on or near any federal property, or merely being in the vicinity of either (a) an event of national significance, or (b) a person under the protection of the Secret Service. The Federal Restricted Buildings & Grounds Improvement Act repeals our right to peacefully assemble and petition the government with our grievances. In fact, it is now illegal to assemble in front of Congress if even one member might be inside.

The new meme cheerfully propagated by the mainstream media (MSM) is the 1-percent-versus-the-99-percent conflict, which fits perfectly into its strategy for maintaining strict political divisions of Left versus Right. This bipartisan strategy is absolutely critical for advancing the agenda of the "1 percent," which, simply stated, is to own and/or control the world's natural and economic resources, including land and mineral rights, water sources, food and energy production, transportation, money supply, and most important of all labor.

Glaringly absent from this current meme is a proper definition by the MSM of exactly who composes the 1 percent. This, too, is absolutely essential, because if the 1 percent is actually identified, broad-based consensus is achievable and solutions can begin. Instead, the 1 percent is left to the imaginations of the 99 percent, allowing for a wide variety of culprits responsible for society's woes, and no possible consensus - hence no solutions, either.

If you pay attention, you'll find that solutions are never proffered in any of the MSM's endless dialogue permeating the broadcasts, and rarely in print. The very last thing the 1 percent wants are viable solutions emerging to upset the status quo.

So who is the 1 percent?

For decades, the political machine has perpetuated a deliberate void in the average American's knowledge and understanding of our foreign policies, militarism versus defense, and the relative budgets for all three. The mainstream media gives these subjects a wide berth as far as meaningful coverage goes. Even the federal budget for defense breaks out military spending from other significant defense expenditures.

Let's review how U.S. defense spending compares to the rest of the developed world. Military spending in 2010 for Germany was $46.8 billion, United Kingdom $57.4 billion, France $61.8 billion, Japan $51.4 billion, Russia $52.5 billion, and China $114.3 billion. The U.S. was $687 billion! That is nearly twice as much as all these other countries combined, adding up to $384.2 billion by comparison, according to 2010 World Military Budgets, issued by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Military Expenditure Database.

(Editor's note: This is one of three articles on Ron Paul in the December 8 issue of the River Cities' Reader. The package also includes Dave Trotter's "Electability: Ron Paul Soundly Defeats Obama for These 11 Reasons" cover story and Todd McGreevy's "Media Manipulation and Ron Paul.")

Participants at the Iowa Straw Poll in Ames, Iowa, in August 2011. Photo by Jesse Anderson.How curious is it that both liberal and conservative media have so obviously colluded in blacking out meaningful coverage of GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul? Add to this phenomenon that when coverage is unavoidable, it is heavily biased against Dr. Paul. This blanket policy by the mainstream media (MSM) toward this single candidate begs the question: Why is Ron Paul such a threat to both parties, so much so that the MSM has orders from on high to label him as "unelectable" but offers very little in terms of rationale for why it deems him so?

Voters' curiosity should be piqued over this blatant dismissal of the candidacy of such a highly respected member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Texas voters have elected Dr. Paul 12 times as a Republican, and his base has grown exponentially since he became a national candidate, attracting conservative Republicans, moderate Democrats, and independents alike because his message has remained steadfastly constitutional in all things, no exceptions.

This issue's article on the Scott Emergency Communications Center (SECC) further illustrates government overreach run amok, beginning with our state legislators. State law (Iowa Code 28E) enabled the creation of the Scott Emergency Communications Center, an intergovernmental agency composed of five separate entities: the Scott County Emergency Management Agency, Scott County, the cities of Davenport and Bettendorf, and Medic EMS. Funding SECC is enabled through more state legislation (Iowa Code 29C) that provided for an unelected board as a brand-new taxing authority, with no limit on how much it may levy. And, as the details emerge, SECC gets to operate with no oversight whatsoever.

Let us never forget that the SECC was sold to Scott County taxpayers as a 7,800-square-foot building to consolidate emergency dispatching and enhance 911 service, saving taxpayers money along the way. The Bettendorf City Council barely passed the measure to join this scheme, approving it 4-3 in December 2007. The intergovernmental agreement that formalized this financial boondoggle specifically dictates that all decisions shall be guided by the 2006 CTA Communications consolidation study. So how did CTA's 7,800 square feet balloon into 27,000 square feet by February 2009?

The dismissal by SECC Director Brian Hitchcock and Scott County Administrator Dee Bruemmer of the very study that is to guide their decision-making, as the intergovernmental agreement dictates, stands as testimony that citizens need to be very concerned, and extremely vigilant. Such dismissal suggests that there was never any real intention to follow CTA's recommendations to begin with. This is further evidenced by Hitchcock's claim of good stewardship by reducing the original architectural design from a 36,000-square-foot facility to 27,000 square feet.

To my amazement, nearly every time I mention the new SECC911, I find residents have no idea that we have consolidated multiple jurisdictions' emergency dispatching and law-enforcement record-keeping into a single new building and operation. What a shame. Especially because the Scott Emergency Communications Center (SECC) is now the county's second-largest budget item, and is funded using a newly established "no cap" taxing authority. This means taxpayers can be endlessly tapped for any and all of the SECC's funding needs without consent from our elected county and city representatives.

Thanks to emergency-management legislation called "28E" passed by the Iowa legislature and signed into law by former Governor Chet Culver, our local governments ceded authority for a critical component of public-safety services to an independent, unelected board that is answerable to no one, least of all the people who pay for it. The SECC is a classic example of government run amok.

Eldridge resident Diane Holst, a civic hero by any standard, has followed the SECC from its inception. She is so far ahead of the game in terms of knowledge, and connecting the dots, that she shames the supervisors, and even staff, with her inquiries, often evidenced by their inability to competently respond.

Scott County is lucky to have Ms. Holst. Because if you think your elected representatives are managing the business of the county, think again. The vast majority of the elected leaders are clueless about the details of how the taxpayers' money is being spent. This is evidenced by merely attending any board meeting. County staff is more than happy to perpetuate this arrangement, because it leaves them free to spend tax dollars with impunity. It certainly explains why the staff nearly always gets a pass on incomplete, vague explanations when Ms. Holst presents common-sense, relevant questions.

The institutional laziness, incompetence, and never-saw-a-new-taxing-authority-I-didn't-love/let-me-rubber-stamp-that-budget mentality of our elected supervisors is embarrassing at best, infuriating at worst. In the October 13 SECC Board meeting, County Board and SECC Board Chair Tom Sunderbruch could not contain his rudeness toward Ms. Holst when she voiced her concerns over safety issues. She suggested that an apology to our law enforcement was in order from the SECC Board for their previous dismissive attitudes with regard to the rank-and-file's concerns about the new SECC system - concerns that are absolutely founded, as this issue's cover story illustrates. "If you read the open-meetings law of Iowa," Sunderbruch stated, "we don't have to allow you to speak. So unless you have something new to say, we've heard enough."

Technically, Sunderbruch is correct. And therein lies part of the problem. The only time the public is mandated an opportunity to address these supposed stewards of our tax dollars is during a public hearing for such items as bonding for debt to pay for no-bid contracts for radios costing taxpayers millions. Sunderbruch's reaction to Holst's well-documented concerns exposes his inferior understanding of the issues that have plagued the SECC - an unacceptable demeanor from such a leader, considering the magnitude of SECC.

Bettendorf Alderwoman and mayoral candidate Patricia Melinee expressed her concerns in 2007 over the loss of city jurisdiction over dispatching if the county controls the funds. Her concerns were dismissed by most as "overwrought," when she should be commended for proactive problem-solving. And then-Davenport Alderman Keith Meyer, in an attempt to engage the split Bettendorf council (which voted 4-3 to join SECC) in a dialogue prior to a vote, was called "out of order" by then-County Board Chair Jim Hancock, and the vote was rushed through.

Does one size fit all? Is consolidation of government services among multiple jurisdictions efficient? In theory, perhaps. But the SECC is a newly created government entity, different from any other in Scott County and dangerously unaccountable to the taxpayers, therefore highly susceptible to ballooning out of control relative to expenses and/or scope of services.

Consider that, before it opened its doors, the project was sold to the taxpayers as a cost savings of nearly $5 million over 20 years, with a $2-million, 6,000-square-foot building. That's how it was advertised. But that's not what taxpayers got. The project exploded into a $7.3-million, 27,500-square-foot building, with equipment, radios, and software ratcheting up the price tag to $28 million, just for starters.

The study used to justify the project to the public is now being heralded by the administrators as "flawed," and merely "a guideline." Never mind those terms were referred to in the intergovernmental agreement as governing the project, via a commissioned study that specified the SECC. This is a typical bureaucratic ploy, and only works when the public isn't paying attention and sworn elected officers shirk their duties.

Scott County residents have no one to blame but themselves. We have behaved like absentee landlords and/or managers when all of this went down. And clearly employees do not respect what management does not inspect.

If you want to engage and begin inspecting what your SECC government is doing, start by going to YouTube.com/ScottIFATV and watch the SECC videos posted there. And you can contact the SECC board members by going to SECC911.org/secc/secc_board.php. Lastly, the SECC Board meets at 5:30 p.m. the third Thursday of every month on the first floor of the county building. The next meeting is November 17.


It can be argued that the biggest contributing factor to America's decline is the virtual collapse of public oversight of our own governments, which has led to government employees at every level - whether local, state, or federal - into behaving like they are the bosses of us and not the other way around.

Unaccountability on the part of our public servants is the root problem plaguing our nation, and civic disengagement is 110-percent responsible. We are fast becoming impotent as a citizenry, allowing rule-making to supersede common law, and doing nothing while our local, state, and federal public servants usurp our liberties under dozens of false pretenses, but most especially under the guise of safety and/or security.

Meanwhile, already entrenched bureaucracies grow ever larger, taking more and more control unto themselves over individuals' use and enjoyment of private property, combining services and creating multiple or intergovernmental jurisdictions of administrative structure that use rule-making to insulate and protect their so-called public-sector fiefdoms - fiefdoms we the people pay for but have no say in.

If not for your own future, then do your children/grandchildren a favor and attend your local county and city meetings on a more regular basis. City-council meetings can be viewed at home on cable TV. Listen, learn, and engage. No resident gets a pass on civic participation these days. There is no excuse for doing nothing, anymore.

It is hard to imagine our leaders approving plans and/or legislation that would suspend the U.S. Constitution under any circumstances, but that is precisely what has occurred. This is not a conspiracy theory, but very real authority that the national government has granted itself under the guise of protecting the country during a declared national emergency.

After 9/11, a series of legislative events took place, most without congressional debate, and nearly all under the people's radar. These include the Homeland Security Act of 2002; the USA PATRIOT Act in its original and renewed forms (which removed due process and allows warrantless searches of and seizures from citizens deemed a threat to "the continuity of government" without probable cause based on the Department of Homeland Security's "Domestic Extremism Lexicon"); the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (HR 5122); the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (HR 4144); the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (HR 6166, which removed the writ of habeas corpus, allowing permanent imprisonment without benefit of counsel or petition to the court); the REAL ID Act (attached to an emergency appropriations bill); the FISA Amendments Act (which gave telecom companies retroactive immunity for providing access to customers' private phone lines); and National Presidential Security Directive 51 (which dictates that Congress has no authority during national emergencies).

Combined, this legislation is dangerous because it asserts the authority to suspend the U.S. Constitution and transfer all governance (city, county, and state) to the federal government. All that is required to assume this transfer of power is a presidential declaration of a national emergency and martial law.

One dictionary defines "incompetent" as "inadequate to or unsuitable for a particular purpose" and "lacking the qualities needed for effective action." I'd say this perfectly describes the political spectrum currently tasked with the leadership of America. Let's throw the mainstream media in with this bunch for good measure.

Most Americans are grossly uninformed. Between the federally controlled curriculum of public education and the woeful malfeasance of the dominating media, corrupt politicians, agency bureaucrats, industry leaders, union bosses, and foundation heads all get a free pass.

Where is the outrage that should accompany the serious breaches of public trust? Exactly what will it take to convince you it is time to take an active role in your city, county, state, and country? Pick one and get involved. You might find you actually enjoy it; working to make a difference is rejuvenating.

Here we go again. The new philosophy of government is to never underestimate the stupidity of Americans. After all, we will swallow anything these days. There is no line Congress can draw in the sand that we will not step over in terms of complacent consent for politicians and bureaucrats, including the courts and police, to abuse their authorities.

Do Americans not understand that as long as we remain silent, doing nothing in response to these outrageous financial manipulations by Congress, they will continue to burden taxpayers with unsustainable governance? How many times do we have to be taken to the woodshed before we resist? Just as the majority of the world's economists predicted, TARP and both stimulus expenditures were eventually exposed as boondoggles. But how quickly Americans forget.

Once again Congress, with the full cooperation of the mainstream media, created a faux crisis to justify even more astronomical spending. For weeks Americans have been hammered with misinformation, half-truths, and, in some cases, outright lies relative to the debt ceiling. Broadcasters, with the sole exception of Judge Andrew Napolitano, warned in dire terms that to not raise the ceiling meant economic "Armageddon," borrowing President Obama's descriptor time and again.

Pages