Hospitals & Asylums

Welcome

Atlas

Legislation

Litigation

Statute

Standard & Poor’s Debt Ceiling and Balanced Budget Amendment Crisis HA-16-7-11

By Anthony J. Sanders

sanderstony@live.com

Fruitless propaganda between the President and Speaker of the House regarding the federal budget is making me sick. The criminal insanity regarding Nobel laureate President Oma killer and Speaker of the Mother Rapist is too much for my health to bear. Federal hackers have made it clear even the HA U.S. Constitution requires amendment. Lawmakers are threatening our permanent Constitutional record with an AA in my writing class to apologize for their D in my math class, if I do not explain the fine point of the repeal of the Second Amendment by a Balanced Budget Amendment to greet petitioners suing the government for a redress of grievances as politely as the AAA/A+1 rating from Standard and Poor’s that might be downgraded as low as AA if S & P cannot be made to understand that economy actually functions on the HA budget, rather than CBO or OMB budget these days. The problem seems to be that the United States is not capable of reading the Federal Budget in Balance FY 2011: Comparison of Bush and Obama HA-28-2-10, that’s $1,000 license would assure Standard and Poor’s that the United States is in no mathematical danger of defaulting on our debt payments. Even without the inevitable radical nationalization of the health insurance industry, HA has a found that a nearly normal deficit of 3.1% of GDP is achievable in FY 2011 and eases within the reason of a 3% of GDP deficit thereafter if only a few simple and necessary spending limits are imposed on the military and medicine and all the greedy pigs in the Cabinet are impeached and surplus funds returned to the Treasurer. Senator Sanders, a civil code support delinquent of $1,000 month himself, must email to the author receipt of the Defense of Social Security Caucus brief HA-1-7-11. The Constitution needs the option of a AAA/A+1 rating for thoroughly repealing paid-off war debts and discrimination as directed by an Optional and Second Optional Protocol to the Balanced Budget Amendment. Perhaps there will be enough HA statute to squeak past the censure of displeasure and amend both the Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of Hospitals & Asylums Non-Governmental Economy (CHANGE) this day? There is certainly more than enough gold in my sinuses for immediate national needs.

Gross Federal Debt 2005-2012 (in billions)

	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Gross Federal Debt	7,905	8,451	8,951	9,986	11,876	13,787	15,144	16,336
% GDP	63.5%	63.9%	64.4%	69.2%	83.4%	94.3%	99.0%	100.8%
Change		546	500	1,035	1,890	1,911	1,357	1,192
% Change		6.9%	5.9%	11.6%	18.9%	16.1%	9.8%	7.9%
Federal Reserve Debt	736	769	780	490	769
% GDP	5.9%	5.8%	5.6%	3.4%	5.4%
Change		33	11	-290	279
% Change		4.5%	1.4%	-37%	57%

Source: OMB Historical Table 7.1 Federal Debt at End of Year 1940-2015. Table 5 HA-28-2-10

On May 16, 2011, the U.S. government reached its Congressionally mandated ceiling for federal debt of $14,294 billion. The Treasury currently estimates that it will have exhausted these exceptional measures on or about Aug. 2, 2011, at which time it will either have to curtail certain current expenses or risk missing a scheduled payment of interest or principal on Treasury securities held by the public. Standard & Poor (S&P) has placed its 'AAA' long-term and 'A-1+' short-term sovereign credit ratings on the United States of America on CreditWatch with negative implications, owing to the dynamics of the political debate on the debt ceiling, there is at least a one-in-two likelihood that S&P could lower the long-term rating on the U.S. within the next 90 days. S&P may lower the long-term rating on the U.S. by one or more notches into the 'AA' category in the next three months, if S&P conclude that Congress and the Administration have not achieved a credible solution to the rising U.S. government debt burden and are not likely to achieve one in the foreseeable future. The CreditWatch action reflects S&P’s view of two separate but related issues. The first issue is the continuing failure to raise the U.S. government debt ceiling so as to ensure that the government will be able to continue to make scheduled payments on its debt obligations. The second pertains to S&P’s current view of the likelihood that Congress and the Administration will agree upon a credible, medium-term fiscal consolidation plan in the foreseeable future (Nikola et al ’11). It would be shame for the Congress and President to raise the debt ceiling when there is so many hundred billion dollars bills of imaginary debt that could be eliminated because they were nothing but accounting errors from the beginning and were never actually administrated. If the President and Congress cannot appease S&P with their revision of the budget the federal government will be expected to agree on raising the debt ceiling by August 2, 2011.

Department of Treasury Balance 2008-2012 (in millions)

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Treasury OMB	548,797	701,775	502,980	593,550	685,279
% Change	11.9%	27.9%	-28.3%	18.0%	15.5%
Treasury Operations Budget Justification		14,582	15,591	17,002	17,500
Treasury Net Interest on Debt		372,518	388,637	455,941	500,000
Treasury Mandatory Accounts		511,515	1,717	90,989	91,000
Treasury Total		896,972	400,472	560,863	600,000
Savings		-195,197	102,508	32,697	85,000

Source: US Treasury. Budget Documents. FY 2011. February 1, 2010 Table 10 HA-28-2-10

The net interest on the debt is not all that much, $450 - $500 billion FY 2011 - 2012. Social security, public health and military are bigger federal expenses. The Treasury Department seems to need some money to reassure S&P that debt limit does not need to be raised. S & P claims to want $4 trillion in collateral. S & P reports that Congress and the Administration are debating various fiscal consolidation proposals. At the high end, budget savings of $4 trillion phased in over 10 to 12 years proposed by the Administration, (separately) by Congressional leaders, as well as by the Fiscal Commission in its December 2010 report, if accompanied by growth-enhancing reforms, could slow the deterioration of the U.S. net general government debt-to-GDP ratio, which is currently nearing 75%. Under S&P’s baseline macroeconomic scenario, net general government debt would reach 84% of GDP by 2013. (Our baseline scenario assumes near 3% annual real growth and a post-2012 phase-out of the December 2010 extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.) Such a percentage indicates a relatively weak government debt trajectory compared with those of the U.S.' closest 'AAA' rated peers (France, Germany, the U.K., and Canada). S&P expects the debt trajectory to continue increasing in the medium term if a medium-term fiscal consolidation plan of $4 trillion is not agreed upon. If Congress and the Administration reach an agreement of about $4 trillion, and if we to conclude that such an agreement would be enacted and maintained throughout the decade, we could, other things unchanged, affirm the 'AAA' long-term rating and A-1+ short-term ratings on the U.S (Nikola et al ’11). We do not find S & Ps national debt statistics to be very credible as a percentage of GDP OMB projects national debt to exceed 100% by the end of FY 2011. Why is the more than $5 trillion scheduled to be paid as net interest on the debt by the Treasury over the next 10 years, not enough to satisfy S & P’s $4 trillion demand? The answer is because the tax collector is having a shortfall of funds on August 2. Are there no medical or military assets that can be liquidated to appease the Treasury’s insatiable appetite for credit? Why is the Treasurer unable to take of the Revenues to pay the Interest on the National Debt without burdening the National Debt or angering S & P? When will Congress and the President stop the incessant babble of savings over ten years and balance the budget as I have done HA-28-2-10.

Department of Health and Human Services Spending 2008-2012 (in millions)

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Health and Human Services OMB	700,442	796,267	868,762	934,426	911,291
% Change	4.2%	13.7%	9.1%	7.6%	-2.5%
HHS Budget Authority	ARRA	779,419	800,271	880,861
HHS Recovery Act ARRA Total of 3 yr. spread	121,315	55,087	45,162	21,066
HHS Budget 3.0% Growth Limit from 2008		721,455	743,099	765,392	788,354
HHS Savings 3.0%		-62,686	132,860	189,127	138,134

Source: HHS FY 2011 President’s Budget for HHS. February 1, 2010 Table 16 shortened and recalculated for 3% although 2.5% is a historically more normal rate of spending growth 3% is more significant HA-28-2-10

A $1.5 trillion annual deficit cannot be balanced with $1.5 trillion in savings over ten years, this ten year variable impossibly complicates the difficult task of eliminating the $1.5 trillion deficit, and completely obsesses the body politic, so as to gain absolutely no benefit from the statement to the news media. I am calling for two core spending reductions. The first is simply that military spending, cresting at $711 billion in FY 2011, must be limited to $500 billion for the rest of the decade, for $211 billion savings. The Department of Defense (DoD) is neither an investment nor a research firm and should return treasonous monies to the Treasury. The second is that public health spending has been hopelessly distorted by the Recovery Act and OMB and CBO records of spending on the Department must drop from $911 billion to $733 billion for $138 billion in savings in FY2012. If the Treasury actually needs any money the Treasury should have no trouble getting it from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) who desperately need to stop paying for medical care the patient reports they didn’t like. Medical payments escalated dramatically under the Recovery Act. The Secretary’s actual budget request is much lower than the money credited by OMB. OMB must recognize that the actual spending of HHS is $50 billion less than what OMB estimates. HHS must not be corrupted by the Recovery Act. Nor should tax collectors be corrupted by HHS. We need to go back to 2008 to find a natural rate of public health spending, undistorted by Recovery Act funds the Department never asked for, $700 billion in FY 2008 as a base year. Whereas we have long been disgusted with the greediness of the health sector we have decided to impose a health industry-wide 3% cap on inflation of prices. A 3% annual inflation of public health spending from $700 in base year FY 2008, $765 billion in FY 2011 and $788 billion in FY 2012. In FY 2011 the Secretary spent $881 billion, including Recovery Act distortion, but OMB credited HHS with $934 billion spending. This discrepancy between OMB and CBO is valued at savings of $50 billion if the President and Congress would only listen to reasonable demands of their Secretary. To balance the budget HHS should reduce spending as much as $100 billion to $788 billion. Growth has been wild and completely defies both the law of supply of demand and the law of diminishing returns. $788 billion in FY 2012 would be a better normal for HHS spending recovering from the Recovery Act distortion. Spending could be reduced by enabling Medicare and Medicaid patients the opportunity to refuse to pay for harmful medical treatment and unspent funds and unethical research and subsidies for the rich should be returned to the Treasury thereby enforcing the law of supply and patient demand. Historically and according to the law of diminishing returns increases in the costs of macro-economic government programs should never increase more than 3% annually. Surely between the returns of medical and military overpayments the Treasurer should be able to earn enough money to pay the net interest on the national debt to the satisfaction of the S & P.

Tenth term Congressman Bob Goodlatte from the 6^th District of Virginia, submitted H.J. RES. 1 to the 111^th Congress on January 6, 2009 when he proposed a three part balanced budget amendment, that would (1) amend the Constitution to require that total spending for any fiscal year not exceed total receipts; (2) require that bills to raise revenues pass each House of Congress by a 2/3 majority; and (3) establish an annual spending cap such that total federal spending could not exceed 18% of the economic output of the United States. H.J. Res. 1 has so far received only 179 sponsors in the House it was by far the most popular of several Proposals for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States H.J.RES.78, H.J. RES 89, S.J. RES 22, S.J. RES 27 and S.J. RES 38. Having won the 111^th Congress, that failed so miserably to balance the budget that not only the 111^th Congress but the Democratic and Republican (DR) duelist system were permanently and totally dissolved, Congressman Goodlatte introduced another balanced budget Constitutional amendment, H.J.Res. 2, that now has 221 cosponsors, and will be introduced after budget negotiations have faltered. The proposed amendments, that might spare the 112^th Congress the dignity of being impartially dissolved in the history books, states in its entirety:

Joint Resolution

Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

Article—

Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.

Section 2. The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide by law for such an increase by a roll-call vote.

Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which total outlays do not exceed total receipts.

Section 4. No bill to increase revenue shall become law unless approved by a majority of the whole number of each House by a rollcall vote.

Section 5. The Congress may waive the provisions of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war is in effect. The provisions of this article may be waived for any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in military conflict which causes an imminent and serious military threat to national security and is so declared by a joint resolution, adopted by a majority of the whole number of each House, which becomes law.

Section 6. The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts.

Section 7. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except for those for repayment of debt principal.

Section 8. This article shall take effect beginning with the later of the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification or the first fiscal year beginning after December 31, 2016.'.

Section 147 Balanced Budget Amendment of HA Book 3 Health and Welfare (HaW) Title 24 of the United States Code states,

A.Strong revenues, together with spending restraint, are critical to the task of reducing the deficit to balance the budget. The budget process of the federal government is led by the President who is responsible for presenting a balanced budget for the State of the Union address under Art. 2 Section 3 of the US Constitution and 31USC(11)§1105 whereby the President must submit his/her budget to Congress after the first week of January and before the first week of February every year and §1106 whereby the President must submit and supplemental or additional budgeting changes and re-appraisements to Congress before July 16^th of every year and 1USC(2)§105 whereby 30 September appropriations occur for the next fiscal year beginning 1 October.

Federal Budget Deficit, 2000-2019

Source: McArdle, Megan. The Deficit Blame Game. The Atlantic. 10 June 2009

1. Congress is responsible for balancing the budget under Art. 1 Section 7 and Art. 1 Section 9 Clause 7 that states, No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time. The goal of a balanced budget is settled law in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33) that was improved in the Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999.

B. The power of Congress to borrow money on the credit of the United States is however conferred by the Constitution at Art. 1 Sec. 8 Cl. 2 and Sec. 4 of the 14^th Amendment to the US Constitution wherefore it has been determined that a Constitutional Amendment is needed as the result of the supremacy clause.

1. The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union had granted to the Continental Congress the power to borrow money, or emit bills on the credit of the United States, transmitting every half-year to the respective States an account of the sums of money so borrowed or emitted.

2. Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 of the Constitution grants to the United States Congress the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States.

3. At the time that the Constitution came into effect, the United States had a significant debt, primarily associated with the Revolutionary War. As early as 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote, I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government; I mean an additional article taking from the Federal Government the power of borrowing. I now deny their power of making paper money or anything else a legal tender. I know that to pay all proper expenses within the year would, in case of war, be hard on us. But not so hard as ten wars instead of one. For wars could be reduced in that proportion; besides that the State governments would be free to lend their credit in borrowing quotas.

4. Although Jefferson made a point of seeking a balanced budget during the early years of his administration, he seems to have later reversed himself, to effect the Louisiana Purchase. But note also that he made no exception for war, but rather saw the requirement of maintaining a balanced budget as a salutary deterrent.

5. The issue of the federal debt was next addressed by the Constitution within Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment (proposed on 13 June 1866 and ratified on 9 July 1868): whereby the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

C. Several balanced budget Amendments have been proposed however no one proposed Amendment has been agreed to. Four follow,

1. The text of the version presented to the Senate and to the House of Representatives which (after revision) was approved by the Senate (by a vote of 69 to 31) on 4 August 1982 but supported by an inadequate majority of the House of Representatives (with a vote of 236 to 187) on 1 October 1982:

Section 1. Prior to each fiscal year, the Congress shall adopt a statement of receipts and outlays for that year in which total outlays are no greater than total receipts. The Congress may amend such statement provided revised outlays are not greater than revised receipts. Whenever three-fifths of the whole number of both Houses shall deem it necessary, Congress in such statement may provide for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a vote directly to that subject. The Congress and the President shall ensure that actual outlays do not exceed the outlays set forth in such statement.

Section 2. Total receipts for any fiscal year set forth in the statement adopted pursuant to this article shall not increase by a rate greater than the rate of increase in national income in the last calendar year ending before such fiscal year, unless a majority of the whole number of both Houses of Congress shall have passed a bill directed solely to approving specific additional receipts and such bill has become law.

Section 3. The Congress may waive the provisions of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war is in effect.

Section 4. The Congress may not require that the states engage in additional activities without compensation equal to the additional costs.

Section 5. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States except those derived from borrowing and total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States except those for repayment of debt principal.

Section 6. This article shall take effect for the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification.

2. Here is a version introduced into the House of Representatives with 160 sponsors on 7 January 1997:

Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.

Section 2. The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide by law for such an increase by a rollcall vote.

Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which total outlays do not exceed total receipts.

Section 4. No bill to increase revenue shall become law unless approved by a majority of the whole number of each House by a rollcall vote.

Section 5. The Congress may waive the provisions of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war is in effect. The provisions of this article may be waived for any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in military conflict which causes an imminent and serious military threat to national security and is so declared by a joint resolution, adopted by a majority of the whole number of each House, which becomes law.

Section 6. The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts.

Section 7. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except for those for repayment of debt principal. The receipts (including attributable interest) and outlays of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds (as and if modified to preserve the solvency of the Funds) used to provide old age, survivors, and disabilities benefits shall not be counted as receipts or outlays for purposes of this article.

Section 8. This article shall take effect beginning with fiscal year 2002 or with the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification, whichever is later.

3. On 17 February 2005, a similar measure to that of 7 January 1997 was introduced with 24 sponsors, differing in these sections:

Section 6. The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts. The appropriate committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate shall report to their respective Houses implementing legislation to achieve a balanced budget without increasing the receipts or reducing the disbursements of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund to achieve that goal.

Section 7. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except for those for repayment of debt principal.

Section 8. This article shall take effect beginning with the later of the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification or the first fiscal year beginning after December 31, 2009.

4. And on 13 July 2005, with 123 sponsors, a version whose first five sections were as those of the previous two above, but which continued thus:

Section 6. The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts.

Section 7. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except for those for repayment of debt principal.

Section 8. This article shall take effect beginning with the later of the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification or the first fiscal year beginning after December 31, 2010.

D. It was therefore redacted a shorter Balanced Budget Amendment for incorporation into Article 71 Chapter 8-D of the Constitution of Hospitals & Asylums Non-Governmental Economy (CHANGE):

Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year in order to balance the federal budget.

Section 2. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which total outlays do not exceed total receipts.

Section 3. The Congress shall enforce and implement a balanced budget by appropriate legislation.

Article 70 of CHANGE explains Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 of the Constitution grants to the United States Congress the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. At the time that the Constitution came into effect, the United States had a significant debt, primarily associated with the Revolutionary War. As early as 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote,

I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government; I mean an additional article taking from the Federal Government the power of borrowing. I now deny their power of making paper money or anything else a legal tender.

I know that to pay all proper expenses within the year would, in case of war, be hard on us. But not so hard as ten wars instead of one. For wars could be reduced in that proportion; besides that the State governments would be free to lend their credit in borrowing quotas.

Several balanced budget amendments have been proposed however no one proposed Amendment has been agreed to. The text of the version presented to the Senate and to the House of Representatives which (after revision) was approved by the Senate (by a vote of 69 to 31) on 4 August 1982 but supported by an inadequate majority of the House of Representatives (with a vote of 236 to 187) on 1 October 1982.

A second version was introduced into the House of Representatives with 160 sponsors on 7 January 1997. On 17 February 2005, a similar measure to that of 7 January 1997 was introduced with 24 sponsors. On 13 July 2005 another was introduced with 123 sponsors.

A Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is desperately needed to assure the American people that Congress and the President are responsible for balancing the budget whereas since 2005 this mathematical feet has been performed by HA and since 2009 federal credibility has become the exclusive right of HA and sole proprietor of the federal budget is not an optimal form corporation especially when being tortured with $666 a month for 6, rather than merely three years, without relief from COLA. My last remaining copy of the Constitution is missing pages, the other was stolen by a Gulf War Veteran. I am sure if a Balanced Budget Amendment was passed Congress could spend some of their greedy over-appropriations distributing free copies of the Constitution to the masses. Goodlatte’s Balanced Budget Amendment is acceptable. It is longer and has more personality than mine. Goodlatte’s Balanced Budget Amendment is a Godsend. However, the electricity went out the moment I realized I needed to amend Article 72 Supremacy Clause Repeals. After giving this issue many years of thought in the Constitution of Hospitals & Asylums Non-Governmental Economy (CHANGE) I pray that Goodlatte’s Balanced Budget Amendment will be used to precisely abolish and replace the Second Amendment right to bear arms that is undermining the hospitality of the Bill of Rights. The right to bear arms is not an appropriate response to right to sue the government for a redress of grievances. The right to bear arms is not considered a constitutional right in most countries around the world, although the right to bear arms has been tastefully used in the Vermont Constitution is not even that popular in State Constitution, gun control being deemed more of a regulatory issue. Rose and Milton Friedman agreed that a Balanced Budget Amendment is needed and the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms needs to go. To truly understand the ramifications of the Balanced Budget Amendment Congress must go back and repeal the Revolutionary war debt from Article VI Section 1 and Civil War debts from Article VI Section 1 and the Civil War Debts and Discrimination after “the whole number of persons in each State” clause of Section 2 of the XIV Amendment. The United States can only be forgiven if the United States learns how to forgive. Neither the United States, the United Nations nor private creditors can continue to hold grudges so many years since the debt has been paid off in full. The Supremacy Clause repeals vindicate the supremacy of Constitution law to even state sanctioned violence and sado-masochism. Goodlatte is highly encouraged to adopt Article 72 Supremacy Clause Repeals as amended for four or five years above, as an “Optional Protocol to the Proposal for a Balanced Budget Amendment to Replace the II Amendment Right to Bear Arms with a Balanced Budget Amendment and Repeal the Revolutionary and Civil War Debt and Racial discrimination from Article VI Section 1 and the Fourteenth Amendment after Section 2 the whole number of persons in each State” exactly as follows.

Optional Protocol to the Proposal for a Balanced Budget Amendment to Replace the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms with a Balanced Budget Amendment and Repeal the Revolutionary War Debt from Article VI Section 1 so the Supremacy Clause would be Number One and the Civil War Debt and Discrimination from Fourteenth Amendment after Section 2 the whole number of persons in each State and Article I Section 9 would read The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States or Congress shall think proper to admit, shall incur a Tax or duty, until such tariffs are progressively eliminated

1.It is hypocritical for the United States to both claim to require a balanced budget and continue to be burdened with war debts from the Revolutionary and Civil Wars in the same Constitution.

2.To learn the true meaning of a Balanced Budget Amendment the nation must repeal, Article VI Section 1, the Fourteenth Amendment after Section 2 and the entire Second Amendment to the United States Constitution that the Balanced Budget Amendment repeals as the national response to petitioners suing the government for a redress of grievances.

3.Art. VI must be repealed in its first clause so that the supremacy clause would be section number one and oath of office, number two.

4.The Fourteenth Amendment would conclude at section 2 to count “the whole number of persons in each State”.

5.The Second Amendment right to bear arms is not an appropriate response to the First Amendment right to sue the government that would be more rational on the basis of federal economics.

For Posterity:

Article VI Section 1 unnecessarily stated,

All debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this constitution shall be as valid against the United States under the constitution, as under the Confederation.

Amendment II seditiously infringed on the First Amendment freedoms particularly the right to sue the government for a redress of grievances stating,

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of the free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment XIV (1868) betrayed the equal protection clause to engage in wars of extermination against Indian tribes after the end of the Civil War and needs to be abolished after Section 2 “the whole number of persons in each State.” clause. Whereas the equal protection clause is quite popular the entire Fourteenth Amendment states,

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and 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.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several State according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State. --, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a Stat, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and the citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation there-in shall be reduced in the proportions which the number of such male citizens shall bear the whole number of male citizens twenty-one year’s age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative to Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave, but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. the Congress shall have power to enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of this article.

Furthermore, Article I Section 9 states, The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person”. It should be amended to read. “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States or Congress shall think proper to admit, shall incur a Tax or duty, until such tariffs are progressively eliminated”.

Amendment III is a completely independent Civil Law Amendment, extending the the Second Amendment’s inappropriate response to the superb First Amendment freedoms and right to sue the government for a redress of grievances and also needs to be repealed and it was thought to provide for a second Civil Law Amendment to fully remove reference to the un-parliamentary language that gave rise to the abominable Alien and Sedition Act of 1800 from the Bill of Rights. The American Colonists were not willing to take the risk that men who injure and oppress the people under their administration and provoke them to cry out and complain will also be empowered to make that very complaint the foundation for new oppressions and prosecutions. James Madison, the Architect of the First Amendment said, “If we advert to the nature of Republican Government, we shall find that the censorial power is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people”.  The right of free public discussion of the stewardship of public officials was thus, in Madison’s view, a fundamental principle of the American form of government.  As Madison said, “Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press”. The year the Constitution, was ratified, in 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote to his friend James Madison, “A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth…and what no just government should refuse”.  Madison wrote Jefferson in 1788, “By omitting a list of rights, the new Constitution denied the new government any power to violate rights”.  However during the first federal elections held in 1788-1789, Madison realized he must run for office promising a bill of rights.  He did it too.  On August 24, 1789 the House of Representatives approved seventeen of Madison’s amendments and sent the resolution to the Senate on August 25, on September 25 President George Washington sent twelve amendments to the states for ratification.  The text of the First Amendment is derived from three of Madison’s proposals. Where they got the Second and Third Amendments is too disgraceful for the History books. The Second Optional Protocol to the Balanced Budget Amendment to replace the Third Amendment with a Civil Law Amendment, is proposed as follows:

Second Optional Protocol to the Balanced Budget Amendment to replace the Third Amendment with a Civil Law Amendment

Section 1 The American legal system is a civil-law system based upon written briefs and human rights.

Section 2 Federal Judges shall be elected to terms of four years in general elections in their respective districts.

Section 3 Justices of the Supreme Court shall be limited to two terms.

Section 4 Associate Justices shall choose a new Chief, from amongst themselves, every year.

Section 5 Government officials convicted of crimes against humanity shall be removed from office.

Section 6 States shall elect district attorneys.

Section 7 States shall elect licensed social workers to judge divorce, mental illness, substance abuse courts and ethic committees and licensed funeral directors to judge probate.

Section 8 States shall probate and parole criminal offenders to halfway houses to safely meet international minimum standards of detention below the legal limit of 250 detainees per 100,000 residents.

Section 9 the death penalty is abolished.

Section 10 Disputes of an international character shall be adjudicated by the Customs Court in New York City.

Thus concludes the Revision of the HA Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. I hope the Constitutional Amendments and existence of private mathematics balancing the FY 2011 satisfies S & P. HA has balanced the federal budget every year since the Balanced Budget Amendments of 2005 except FY 2009 and the FY 2011 budget deficit is within 3.1% of GDP. The federal government has not even paid the sole proprietor of the federal budget a $1,000 license fee and instead prefers to curse the author with $666 a month for 6 rather than just three years without COLA. Perhaps Congressman Goodlatte will be wise enough to purchase the sovereign ciphers from the author and to more skillfully perfect the still politically inconsistent U.S. Constitution adopt both:

1. the Optional Protocol to the Proposal for a Balanced Budget Amendment to Replace the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms with a Balanced Budget Amendment and Repeal the Revolutionary War Debt from Article VI Section 1 so the Supremacy Clause would be Number One and the Civil War Debt and Discrimination from Fourteenth Amendment so Section 2 would end “the whole number of persons in each State” and Art. 1 Sec. 9 Clause 1 would read the Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States or Congress shall think proper to admit, shall incur a Tax or duty, until such tariffs are progressively eliminated” and

2. the Second Optional Protocol to the Balanced Budget Amendment to replace the Third Amendment with a Civil Law Amendment?

Work Cited

Goodlatte, Bob (V-6). Dear Colleague. Cosponsor H.J. Res 1 to require a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. December 9, 2010 branden.ritchie@mail.house.gov

McArdle, Megan. The Deficit Blame Game. The Atlantic. 10 June 2009

Sanders et al. Defense of Social Security Caucus brief. Hospitals & Asylums HA-1-7-11

Sanders, Tony J. Constitution of Hospitals & Asylums Non-Governmental Economy.

Sanders, Tony J. Federal Budget in Balance FY 2011: Comparison of Bush and Obama. Hospitals & Asylums HA-28-2-10

Sanders, Tony J. Health and Welfare (HaW). Book 3. 6^th Draft. Hospitals & Asylums HA-31-7-10

Swan, Nikola G.; Chambers, John; Beers, David. United States of America ‘AAA/A-1+’ Rating Placed on Credit Watch Negative on Rising Risk of Policy Stalemate. Global Credit Portal. Ratings Direct. July 14, 2011nikola_swann@standardandpoors.com, john_chambers@standardandpoors.com, david_beers@standardandpoors.com

U.S. Health and Human Services FY 2011 President’s Budget for HHS. February 1, 2010

U.S. Treasury. Budget Documents. FY 2011. February 1, 2010

White House Office of Management and Budget Historical Table 7.1 Federal Debt at End of Year 1940-2015