TO: ALL  
FROM: Dan Druck, Council on Domestic Relations  
RE: Strategies

Lately, I've been flooded with messages regarding re-analyzing
general strategies, both short term and long term. I thought I'd
post this as a general response to these many messages. 

I'm greatly concerned about getting off track as I believe this is
what part of the COS was all about. Much of what I'll say is my
(and the CDR's) opinion and is not meant to be interpreted as if I
have all the answers. I'll let my suggestions stand on their own
merit.

<<Anybody have a way to kill this (COS) thing DEAD? If we win this
year, will they have to start over again next year or will they
only have to pick up where they left off?>>

There is nothing that anyone can do to prohibit the introduction
of legislation, except to educate legislators so that introduction
and more importantly, passage of dangerous legislation will not be
likely. In answer to the second half of the question, it depends
on the length of each state's legislative session - some are one
year, some are two. The resolutions stand for the duration of the
session. For many reasons I believe that if we defeat the COS this
year, it won't likely be re-introduced in the near future.

<< If not, can we put forward an ALTERNATIVE proposal which will
replace the current COS drive? Tenth Amendment resolutions are
good, but don't seem to defuse the efforts of those pushing for
the COS.>>

That's what THEY tried to do -- I believe the COS was created as
an alternative for the 10th Amendment Resolution/Act movement. Two
things point to this:

1. It was only when the 10th Res/Act movement started picking up
steam that "State Sovereignty" became a "politically correct"
issue (ref. SB1 - the Federal Unfunded Mandates Act which was our
present Congress's first order of business when they convened, the
COS, and you might even peripherally add the Republican's Contract
with America). The *real* state sovereignty movement was (and is)
rapidly becoming a threat to the enemies of the Constitution. The
opposition needed to derail it by creating their own bastardized
version - the COS. With the COS, they've potentially created a
win-win for themselves:

	Win #1. Even if the COS is defeated, they have momentarily
diverted our energy away from the 10th Res\Act efforts and created
confusion in the minds of state legislators. It's also possible
that, by the time we can refocus on the 10th Res\Act, legislators
might say, "Oh no, not another one of those "Sovereignty" things!"

	Win #2. If the COS is successful, they've accomplished
what they've been trying to accomplish for two decades - the
destruction of the Constitution via a Con-Con.

2. The second indication that the COS was spawned by the 10th
Res/Act movement is the redundancy of the pro-con-con efforts.
Keep in mind that the con-con battle goes back to Nelson
Rockefeller's HCR28 of 1976. Over the years since, they've
convinced 32 states to pass con-con calls -- we (the
pro-constitutional movement) have convinced 3 and now, with
Kansas, maybe 4 states to rescind. It would seem that, if a
con-con was their ONLY objective, they could have more simply
focused on getting only 4 or 5 more states to pass a con-con call
resolution.

Mike Goldman wrote: <<There are legislative strategies which seem
generally to work well. Mostly, the best thing to do when a bad
piece of legislation is being  considered is to get a GOOD piece
of legislation introduced to counter it.>>

I emphatically believe that the 10th Res/Act is that GOOD piece of
legislation. The opposition would love for us to abandon it and
return to our tail-chasing strategies of the past. In addition to
its potential for success in returning to our nation a
Constitutional form of government, I would like to list the
following positive points:

	*  The total strategy is completely within the boundaries
of the
	   Constitution and Common Law.

	*  The *total* strategy (see below) is palatable to most
people
	   and legislators - it doesn't come off as radical.

	*  It does not endanger our Constitution.

	*  It has proven acceptance - The Resolution has passed in
14
	   states (one more than the COS) and the Act has been 
	   introduced in one (Oklahoma) where it unanimously
passed 
	   their House committee, their House, and is expected to
pass
	   their Senate.

As there seems to be some lack of understanding about the 10th
Res/Act movement, let me make a couple of things clear. The 10th
Res. was never intended to have "teeth" -- that is where the 10th
Act comes in. The mechanics of this strategy is based on this
simple analogy:

If you rent a house and your landlord doesn't fix the hole in the
roof, he is in violation of the lease. You have the lawful
authority to:

	1. Send him notification of his default (the 10th Res.)

	2. If, after notification, he still doesn't fix the hole
in the
	roof, you have the lawful ability to pay your rent check 
	into an escrow account (the 10th Act) until he is no
longer
	in default. 

In addition to playing out the "lawfulness" of the strategy as
depicted above, the advantages of this strategy are:

	1. The 10th Res. allowed(s) us to identify those states
which are supportive and resistant to the concept. With this info
we can effectively target, for the purposes of passing the 10th
Act, the most receptive states first so that the less receptive
states can be persuaded to join in - the bandwagon effect. By this
point we hope that it has grown so big that the major media dare
not ignore it. 

	2. The 10th Act, if passed by enough states, would
effectively force the federal government back into compliance with
the Constitution. Rommell lost the African Campaign not for a lack
of manpower or equipment - he ran out of gas. If we stop the flow
of money to the federal government, we have effectively severed
their fuel line. The participating states would generally decide
what is Constitutional and start making *sequential* demands on
the feds so that the apple cart would not be upset. We, the
People, via our state legislators, would play a BIG role in
creating these demands.

	3. If we fail in our efforts fix the problem via our 10th
Res/Act efforts and eventually end up with a national disaster
(economic collapse, armed revolution, etc.) we have at least
educated a lot of people (including state legislators) as to what
the real source of the disaster is. Perhaps the numbers that are
being educated via our efforts will be enough to react to such a
disaster with a strategy yet to be determined.

	4. Long Term Strategies. One of the big things that got us
into this mess is the 17th Amendment (1913/14). Prior to the 17th,
US Senators were not elected by the masses (democracy = mob rule)
but were appointed by the State Legislators -- we had a stratified
system of governance and power, where all levels of interest -
nation, states and people were represented equally. Senators were
chosen by the Legislatures of the individual states to represent
them, individually, the Executive branch represented the Federal
Government and the House represented the people. The 17th
Amendment changed all that by vanquishing the individual states'
representation since it eliminated the senators' accountability to
the states (states had and used the right to recall bad senators).
This change has caused our states (and We, the People) to lose
their sovereignty and therefore become over-run by a now
monolithic Federal Government. 

Eventually, the 17th Amendment should be overturned so that state
legislators could go back to the business of running state
government as the US Senate would be their operative arm in the
federal government. That is the final goal in the overall
strategy.

In summation, I believe the anti-COS battle and the pro-10th
battle are one in the same. To demonstrate how to fight the COS
while priming the 10th Res/Act's pump, please see my message
entitled: "Cover Letter".

As I stated, I don't profess to have all the answers and welcome
feedback.

In pursuit of liberty,

Dan Druck, CDR