Before 1913, and for 137 years as a nation, the United States had no federal income tax. The expenses of the federal government were covered by tariffs assessed on goods from other countries wishing access to America’s market. Money flowed in externally from other countries. Thereafter, and today, the vast majority of federal expenses come internally out of the pockets of the American taxpayer. The federal government spends what it wants borrowed from a private income source called the Federal Reserve which must be repaid with interest for the use of their money, just like any bank. This is called the national debt which now exceeds 38 trillion dollars.
The heart of Trump’s Parallel Economic System is the tariff on goods from other countries wishing access to our markets —the same system used the first 137 years of our history as a nation until 1913. Tariff revenue soared in FY 2025 more than 240% from the year before moving to over 300% by October. The Deep State does not want a parallel system that competes with their monopoly through their Federal Reserve and will do everything in its power to destroy it. Thus far all signals are encouraging including the recent Supreme Court decision which actually only killed the weakest tariff law of the many long-standing strong ones.
President Trump knows this debt is not sustainable and a collapse is imminent. He is trying to restore the funding system that sustained the country for its first 137 years as a nation with no national debt. That system is today called the Parallel Economic System which we will switch back to when it can sustain us. It is getting stronger every month. The heart of this Parallel Economic System is the tariff on goods from other countries wishing access to our markets.
The Federal Reserve created in 1913 is the Deep States’ funding, enslaving and destroying entity. They intend we never be out of debt to them and taxpayers give to it a sizable portion of their income every year which seems never to decrease until they are safely dead. We want freedom from it. Until Trump it had no real resistance nor competition. The Deep State wishes to destroy Trump and his Parallel Economic System. No other president has tried to get free from the Federal Reserve. Trump knew that it would be opposed by all Deep State aligned and influenced politicians both Democrat and RINO.
Trump knew his return to tariffs as the principle source of income for federal expenses would be challenged. The Deep State wanted the Supreme Court to rule it unconstitutional to end the competition. Trump tricked them into using our weakest statute on tariffs so it, not the funding practice, could be sacrificed. It worked! After all, tariffs had Congressional approval throughout American history. If he lost the case it could be brought back using a stronger statute. The Court ruled he could not charge countries “even one dollar,” but his tariffs could be used to block a nations unwanted goods from entry. This was vastly more important and certainly suggested retaining tariffs (X22 Report hereafter not cited, Ep. 3845b, Feb. 22, 2026, 53:16).
The tariffs challenged are the ones using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) which is a federal law enacted in 1977 granting the president authority to counter unusual and extraordinary threats to national security without requiring congressional approval or extensive agency review. Because of its vagueness it became the “go to” authority for new tariffs more especially in a “hostile to Trump” Congress (combining Democrat/RINO opposition) becoming the majority in the U. S. Senate.
In the dissent ruling, Justice Kavanaugh encouraged Trump’s use of the other stronger statutes on tariffs going forward. In the 6 to 3 ruling Trump lost the use of this single act in establishing tariffs, not critical to their continued existence, but miraculously won the case to continue them with the minority vote. The need for tariffs was not damaged or even discouraged. The ruling made Trump’s use of tariffs in other statutes stronger. The Deep State tariff threat was vaporized.
On C-SPAN Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explained, “The Court did not rule against President Trump’s tariffs. Six Justices simply ruled that IEEPA authorities cannot be used to raise even one dollar of revenue. This administration will invoke alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs.” (“On Tariffs and the Economy” Ep. 3845a, Feb. 22, 2026, 16:16).
Trump wrote, “Now the Court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our country, a much more powerful right than many people thought we had… But now I am going in a different direction, which is even stronger than our original choice. As Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his descent: ‘The decision might not substantially constrain a President’s ability to order tariffs going forward. This is because numerous other federal statutes authorize the President to impose tariffs and might justify most, if not all, of the tariffs issued in this case. Those statutes include, for example, the Trade Expansion Act of 1952, Sec. 232, TheTrade Act of 1974, Sec. 122, Sec. 201, Sec. 301 and The Tariff Act of 1930, Sec. 338.”
Trump continued, “The Supreme Court’s decision today made a president’s ability to both regulate trade and impose tariffs more powerful and crystal clear rather than less. There will no longer be any doubt, and the income coming in and the protection of our companies and country will actually increase because of this decision. Based on long-standing law and hundreds of victories to the contrary the Supreme Court did not overrule tariffs, they merely overruled a particular use of IEEPA tariffs…In order to protect our country a president can actually charge more tariffs than I was charging in the past under the merits of a tariff authority which have also been confirmed and fully allowed.” Then he doubled down. “Therefore, effective immediately, all national security tariffs Section 232 existing, Section 301 tariffs remain in place and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under Section 122 over and above our normal tariffs already being charged” (Ep. 3845a, February 22, 2026, 19:04).
The ruling had a possible interesting side benefit. If it is true that “US consumers paid for 90% of IEEPA refunds —$120 BN— should go direct to consumers / firms. And with refund timing open-ended, they can be sent any time before midterms. Did the Court just give Trump the ability now to send everyone a $2,000 dividend check as he suggested last Fall, sometime before the 2026 midterm elections, this from tariff money (Ep. 3845b, Feb. 22, 2026, 48:03)? Perhaps!!
Trumps’ Parallel Economic System was not destroyed by the Deep State as intended and will continue to grow until it replaces the Federal Reserve as the funder of federal expenses as it once was for 137 years and possibly end our federal income tax as well. Wow!!
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution and a syndicated columnist on current events. Read his weekly columns at www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column #861
Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.
We think of the Pilgrims enjoying abundant food on the first Thanksgiving Fall 1621, but this was not their real reality. Few mention the starving times the first year in 1620 when half died of starvation that winter. Harvests were not bountiful in that year and the next two. Plymouth was beset by laziness due to lack of incentive and thievery due to hunger.
Thanksgiving did fill their bellies briefly, and they were grateful, but abundance was anything but common and thievery due to hunger existed. They endured the starving times the first year in 1620 when half died of starvation that winter. Harvests were not bountiful in that year and the next two.
William Bradford, the governor of the colony, in his History of Plymouth Plantation reported that “much was stolen both by night and day” to alleviate the prevailing condition of hunger. The “feast” of the first Thanksgiving did fill their bellies briefly, he reported, and they were grateful, but abundance was anything but common. Why did this happen? Because they had fallen victim to the socialistic philosophy of “share the wealth.” This dis-incentivized the productive base of society.
Then suddenly, as though night changed to day, the crop of 1623 was bounteous, and those thereafter as well, and it had nothing to do with the weather or soil. Bradford wrote, “Instead of famine now God gave them plenty and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God.” He concluded later, “any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day.”
One variable alone made the difference and ended the three-year famine. They abandoned the notion of government (or corporation) owning the means of production and distribution in favor of the individual having property and being responsible to take care of himself. Before, no one benefited by working because he received the same compensation as those who did not. After the change everyone kept the benefits of his labor. The basic natural law, “you reap what you sow,” was violated. You can’t eat what is not sown. In a just society those who chose not to work basically chose also to be poor and the government (corporation) does not confiscated from those who produced to give to those who will not. People may share their wealth as in giving charity but government may not morally confiscate your money and give it to another.
Ironically all this could have been avoided had Plymouth consulted history and communicated with their neighboring colony, some distance south of them, who had been down the same trail 13 years before. Jamestown too was first a socialist society where “each produced according to his ability and received according to his need,” (revitalized by Karl Marx centuries later), which, of course, affected supply. One cannot divide what does not exist. Our textbooks tell us that only one of twelve survived the first two years for precisely the same reason, starvation. The problem, as noted by Tom Bethel in his work The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity through the Ages, was identified by an unnamed participant as “want of providence, industrie and government, and not the barenness and defect of the Countrie.”
Captain John Smith is credited with having saved the floundering Virginia colony by his “no workie, no eatie” government program (the Virginia Company was the government) and was hated. Addicted to the promise of getting something for nothing, even if it is always less than promised, the receiving part of the population will always oppose their not getting their “fair share.” Sound familiar? Captain Smith was eventually carted off to England in chains as fast as the parasitic population could do so. Once again, why? Philip A. Bruce in his Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, p. 121, called it agricultural socialism. “The settlers did not have even a modified interest in the soil…. Everything produced by them went into the store, in which they had no proprietorship.” When settlers finally were allowed to own their own property, and keep what they produced, things changed over night.
Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote of incoming prosperity, beginning in 1614, after ownership of land was allowed. “When our people were fed out of the common store, and labored jointly together, glad was he [who] could slip from his labor, or slumber over his tasks he cared not how, nay, the most honest among them would hardly take so much true pains in a week, as now for themselves they will do in a day, neither cared they for the increase, presuming that however the harvest prospered, the general store must maintain them, so that we reaped not so much corn from the labors of thirty as now three or four do provide for themselves.”
Let us be grateful for the prosperity that we have—even the poorest among us. Jamestown and Plymouth set us upon a course that recognized that prosperity requires incentive to flourish and that the profit motive stimulates industry. We are so grateful that, having recognized the poison of “the share the wealth” philosophy, they purged it from their midst and proceeded to make America the most prosperous country on earth.
In Plymouth half died the first year. In Jamestown it was much worse, only 60 of the first 400 survived by the Spring of 1610. They ate mice, rats, cats, dogs, snakes, horses, and some, desperate from starvation, resorted to cannibalism. Starvation was common in both societies as was socialism. No one benefited by working because he received the same compensation from the storehouse as those who did not work. Prosperity for both came when the individual had his own property and was made responsible to take care of himself.
Since Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected in 1932, however, America has eased, even more so in the 1960’s and 1970’s, progressively into a incentive destroying socialist economy. The recent government shutdown demonstrated how much money is forcibly taken from hard working citizen taxpayers and redistributed to the half of Americans that pay no federal income taxes; this through SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program —formerly Food Stamps, renamed to reduce stigma), and like programs (X22 Report, Ep. 3761b, Oct.27, 2025, 1:02:18). There are 42 million people in this country currently receiving food stamps, 12.3% of the U.S. population, 59% of all illegal aliens are collecting food stamps says Rob Finnerty of Newsmax (Ibid., Ep. 3762b, Oct, 28, 2025, 1:03:00). Supposedly it is against the law for illegals to be on the program but like everything else it is not enforced and they are.
Teachers generally are no longer sharing the early harsh lessons of our socialist beginnings in our first Thanksgiving. Chances are likely they never had it themselves. It is up to parents and grandparents to share the above. Perhaps you will be able to do so for those you love at the dinner table this Thanksgiving. Their failures taught them how to incentivize productivity resulting in giving our posterity the wealthiest, and 150 years plus after, the freest society in the history of the world. This forever, lest we forget what our first colonists learned in both societies! Socialism has never given prosperity to any society.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution and a syndicated columnist on current events. Read his weekly columns at www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column #847
Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.
At one time Democrats were as vociferous against free healthcare for illegal aliens unlawfully crossing our borders as Republicans. Consider the following. Bill Clinton, “All Americans, … in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public services they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more, by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens.” (Bill Clinton’s State of the Union Address given on January 24, 1995).
In the Democrat presidential primary debate (June 27, 2019) the moderator asked the candidates to raise their hands if their health-care plans would cover undocumented immigrants—the illegals. Of the 20 Democrat candidates seeking the presidency 19 raised their hand. At this moment illegals became their main constituents.
Hillary Clinton promoted her husband’s healthcare reform as First Lady, “We do not think the comprehensive healthcare benefits should be extended to those who are undocumented workers and illegal aliens.” She stated that undocumented immigrants would not be eligible for his proposed plan. (The Washington Post, July 1, 2019) Adding, “We do not want to do anything to encourage more illegal immigration in this country. We know now that too many people come in for medical care as it is. We certainly don’t want them having the same benefits that American citizens are entitled to have” (X22 Ep. 3763b, Oct. 29, 2025, 51:38).
Barack Obama in a joint session of Congress Sept 9, 2009 emphatically stated, “There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” (“Providing Health Care for Illegal Immigrants: Understanding the House Health Care Bill,” by Robert Rector, Heritage Foundation, Nov. 24, 2009).
Five years later President Obama told Congress. “Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we’re also a nation of laws. Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable — especially those who may be dangerous. That’s why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent… But today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it. Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules. Business owners who offer their workers good wages and benefits see the competition exploit undocumented immigrants by paying them far less. All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America….”
Obama continued, “When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system. And I began by doing what I could to secure our borders. Today, we have more agents and technology deployed to secure our southern border than at any time in our history (Administration of Barack Obama, Address to the Nation on Immigration Reform, November 20, 2014).
Chuck Schumer, presently the lead Democrat in the US Senate, once held similar views. In archived records from the Congressional Record on August 1, 1996, then Congressman Chuck Schumer, made remarks about immigration and benefits. He stated that non-citizens receiving SSI had grown sharply (from ~128,000 in 1982 to ~738,000 in 1994) and said: “…a whole lot of people determine they can come to the United States … they come to the United States for a hand-out. What did they do? They received SSI and Medicaid. They received a lot of Government assistance. Thank you very much, taxpayer…” GovInfo
The idea of the American taxpayer, who could barely afford his own healthcare, funding healthcare benefits for 50% of his neighbors who pay no federal income taxes, AND those who unlawfully crossed our borders reflected a mainstream Democratic stance at the time thus national health insurance explicitly limited eligibility to U.S. citizens and legal residents. Both political parties agreed, hence the laws prohibiting were very clear—still are. Illegals, those coming into the county through the back door and illegally, were prohibited the benefits of the taxpayer. There is no free money. Socialism forces those who produce to fund those who do not.
But in the 2010’s progressives (socialists) saw votes from the masses attracted by free food, subsidized housing and healthcare. California began covering undocumented children under Medi-Cal (2016) and adults under certain income thresholds (2019–2024). Illinois, New York, and Washington followed with similar limited-coverage programs. By the end of the 20-teens a rhetorical and policy shift from exclusion to total inclusion for everyone was complete in the Democrat Party. Every one in the world could invade America and expect free or subsidized everything at the American taxpayer’s expense—and they came in the millions. Biden unconstitutionally let them in and they were instantly Biden Democrats. If America could not afford them they just printed more money. The escalating NATIONAL DEBT NOW OVER $38 TRILLION AT $328,220 PER TAX PAYER (the readers bill) would just be moved to the next generation.
Everyone in the world could now invade America and expect free or subsidized everything at the American taxpayer’s expense–and they came in the millions . Notice the shoe prints are going into the U.S. but the border gate was pushed outward into Mexico by the Biden government inviting them in.
The best visual of the above described transition was the Democratic presidential primary debate (June 27, 2019) where the moderator asked the candidates to raise their hands if their health-care plans would cover undocumented immigrants—the illegals. Of the 20 Democrat candidates seeking the presidency 19 raised their hand. Free healthcare—the world noticed and flooded in.
When Congresswoman Maxine Waters was recently asked by a reporter whether “Democrats are willing to shut down the U.S. government to prioritize healthcare for illegal immigrants,” she partially avoided the question by saying “Democrats are demanding healthcare for everybody;” which, of course, would include illegals (“Maxine Waters Gets TESTY When Asked if Democrats Are Shutting Down Government Over Healthcare for Illegals,” by Mike LaChance, Gateway Pundit, Sep. 30, 2025). Democrats now demand that American taxpayers foot the bill for healthcare for illegal immigrants world wide, even if doing so remains against the law and unconstitutional.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution and a syndicated columnist on current events. Read his weekly columns at www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column #845
Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.
A few weeks ago we published, “Before 1913 No One Paid Income Taxes, Tariffs Covered Everything.” Actually we have always had tariffs as the Constitution requires “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives…” and, “The Congress shall have Power: To lay and collect Taxes, Duties Imposts and Excises…” with duties being a synonym for tariffs (Article I, Sections 7 and 8). But 124 years later, with the ratification of the 16th Amendment in 1913, America replaced the tariff tax on countries selling their products in the United States as the primary source of revenue for the federal government with a forced income tax on its own residents. Today most paying are taxed a fourth of their income.
Canals, shown in red, were a major source of transportation in the Old Northwest 1820-1860. Two north south canals from Lake Erie traversed Ohio to the Ohio river continuing South to the Mississippi River then to the Gulf of America. The most famous of all the canals was the Erie Canal carrying goods from the Great Lakes to Buffalo, New York then 363 miles East to the Hudson River than South to New York City and the Atlantic Ocean. Commerce to and from New York City necessitated their going to skyscrapers to accommodate the traffic. Tariffs funded all this including the skyscrapers. There was no federal income tax until 1913. Americans kept all their earnings. The same was so of four transcontinental railroads that followed.
The first concern of the newly formed Republic was how it would fund itself differently than had their former British government, as an object of economic control which fed their rebellion. They passed the Tariff Act of 1789, “which levied duties on imported goods to raise revenue and protect American industries from foreign competition” (TRUMP’S TARIFFS Constitutional, or Executive Overreach?,”New American, March 24. 2025, p. 21-22). Such funded a series of canals in or through the Appalachian mountains, the most famous being the Erie Canal linking the Great Lakes with the Hudson River and the Atlantic Ocean, 363 miles long in an unprecedentedly efficient waterway. We had four transcontinental railroads, the Civil War, and the Spanish American War. We had schools, colleges, subways, an army and navy. Tariffs funded the Industrial Revolution and Americans kept all their earnings which stimulated the economy.
Many believe this still realistic if we do three things. 1) Remove the trillions in waste and fraud identified by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) led by Elon Musk. 2) Require all federal spending to stay within the constitutional list Article I, Section 8. 3) Return to the tariff as our source of federal income excepting “unavoidable wars,” as George Washington admonished in his famous Farewell Address.
It was Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt, however, that ushered in the fourth branch of government, the federal bureaucracy, that necessitated a gigantic federal budget. “Beginning with the New Deal, the entire complexion of the executive branch changed, as president Franklin D. Roosevelt effected an unprecedented revolution … a permanent entrenched, professional government bureaucracy to impose continuity.” He “set up a welter of new government agencies tasked with regulating every aspect of Americans’ lives, organs that could effectively legislate without the encumbrances of legislative process, and which were ‘apolitical’ – that is, unaccountable. All of this was accomplished by FDR via executive order, particularly during his fabled ‘First 100 Days,’ which featured an effusion of executive orders and proclamations without precedent, along with an enormous volume of enabling legislation passed by a supine Congress” (“President or King,” The New American, March 24, 2025, pp. 9-10).
Roosevelt created “69 new government regulatory agencies” now referred to as the alphabet soup agencies. No president changed the government and Constitution more in his first 100 days in office than he. It was indeed a bloodless revolution leaving us thereafter at the mercy of Big Government. Moreover, he put these —not under legislative branch authority but the executive—where they operated virtually “free of accountability….This sprawling regulatory regime, wholly illegitimate by any constitutional standard, has been inserted into the executive branch…[this] completely restructured the executive branch and redefined the powers of the presidency without even the formality of a constitutional amendment.” Roosevelt’s first 100 days in office established “an unprecedented executive power grab that utterly —and illicitly— transformed the entire federal government and laid the foundation of modern Big Government” (Ibid.).
Donald Trump emphasized the tariff in his first term and is presently making it ever more dominant in the economy today. With it he believes we can gradually end federal income taxes altogether—as was once the case for more than half of our history. He would also like to investigate and audit the Federal Reserve, with a view of removing it, which serves as an open-ended credit card for the Deep State allowing it to create money at will for its nefarious projects and purposes. The most visible consequence of it is inflation which destroys the value of everyones money especially retirees on fixed incomes and may prevent the young from ever owing a home of their own.
Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt virtually created the Big Government regulatory state wholly illegitimate by any constitutional standard. He created “69 new government regulatory agencies” and served four terms in office. He controlled the legislative and executive branches of government. The media and his party swooned over him. After him his own party supported a two term limitation on the office. If we ever had a dictator in office it was him. Ironically, President Trump is called by them a dictator for trying to undo his/their regulatory state. This makes Trump the only dictator in history advocating less government and taxes.
There is considerable evidence that the Deep State, then called Internationalists, abandoned the tariff for their federal income tax and the open-ended credit system of the Federal Reserve or Central Bank. These hatched the same year, 1913. Trump’s America First Policy is a return to protectionism and a rejection of the past—even present— move toward globalism.
Trump believes that “America has been taken advantage of through unfair trade practices which have weakened America’s “manufacturing, led to job losses, and made the country too dependent on foreign suppliers—particularly China.” He would like “to reduce our reliance on foreign nations for essential goods.” (TRUMP’S TARIFFS, p. 22). He believes he can do this and restore the tariff as the nation’s majority source of income as it once was, leaving the people untaxed.
Some are critical, as am I, as the Constitution gives only Congress the “Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises”—not the president. But that authority too was transferred by FDR to the Executive Branch by his signing the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 (Ibid., p. 23). So Trump is not violating the Constitution by initiating tariffs as used by both parties for ninety years.
But that is a small issue next to Trump’s attempt to reveal and destroy the ‘secret combination’ now commonly called the Deep State and Congress seems unable to impeach even a single rogue judge. We’ll correct Mr. Trump later. Other than Kennedy and Reagan, Trump is the only president willing to take a bullet to remove the Deep State.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution and a syndicated columnist. Read his weekly columns at www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column # 820 `
Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.
As a nation under the U.S. Constitution we are 236 years old. The first 124 of these years we had no federal income tax and handled our national expenses quite well, most of those years without a national debt. Today most are assessed a fifth to a fourth of their gross income. Prior to 1913 we kept what is now taken from us. We first advocated a return to this system on Dec. 13 2013,“Blows to Liberty 100 Years Ago Still Impact You” (LibertyUnderFire.org).
The then existing Deep State, then called Internationalist, prompted this. They wanted this financial “water faucet” that they could turn on at will. They could purchase anything—even people. They created a private corporation, the Federal Reserve, and pushed for the 16th Amendment to the Constitution which now funded the government from the taxpayer, an internal source, rather than by tariffs from other countries, an external source.
What would you spend it on were it not taken from you? Normally not on the basics such as food, housing, and utilities as they likely are covered in what you are allowed to retain. You would spend the extra fourth of your salary on hundreds of items that are made by others as well as services you might like. This not only would enrich your life but it would provide jobs for others making those items or providing those services.
Would you spend it more wisely than the federal government? Likely! Most of the money taken from you by the federal government is spent on perpetual war, foreign aid, grants to privileged portions of our society, and endless unconstitutional subsidized programs; the last two of which basically take the money of those who produce and redistribute it to those who do not. Even some non-tax payers get income tax refunds as we have reported—so corrupt is the system.
Of course, those receiving and benefiting from these programs will defend them. But the fact remains that tax monies provide largely government jobs, which are almost entirely consumption jobs (jobs that consume the production of society but produce little consumable). Such jobs cannot produce for public consumption a potato, a carton of milk, or even a can of hair spray. They bring another person to the table to eat, but not another to produce something to eat.
What largely brought about the vast give-away programs of the Twentieth Century was the now 112-year-old 16th Amendment—the federal income tax. All three 1912 presidential candidates Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Woodrow Wilson, their respective parties, and the then existing Deep State, then called Internationalist, did this to us. They wanted this financial “water faucet” that they could turn on at will. They could purchase anything—even people.
Prior to 1913 the federal government remained mostly faithful to her grants of power in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which left them with only four powers: 1) to tax, 2) pay the debts, 3) provide for the general welfare and 4) provide for the common defense. Because the federal government has the inclination to grow their authority the last two power grants, general welfare and common defense, each had eight qualifiers to harness them more fully. Outside these qualifiers the federal government had no power to tax or spend—still doesn’t.
General welfare then meant everyone equally (general) as opposed to “specific welfare” or “privileged welfare” as it is today, targeting those to forfeit and those to receive monies. The Constitution did not deny states, counties, or cities from having such programs, only the federal government. But politicians soon learned that the more they promised to the people, from the money of others, the easier it was to get elected and stay elected.
The problem with the federal government going off the list and funding things clearly not on it was that each time they did so the stronger the inclination to do so again. One minor departure begets another until one notices that what the federal government does has little or no relationship to the list in the Constitution. I ask my students what would happen if they took one lollypop to kindergarten and gave it to one child? What would the others say? Where is mine? Try taking away long provided benefits from a privileged welfare group, as for example food stamps, and see how popular you are with that voting group in the next election.
So why does the government now need a fourth of everything you make and it is still not enough? Answer, because we went off the listed powers of the Constitution and every departure required more taxpayer funding. The solution to less tax is less government. A side benefit is more freedom. The productive classes would not be hurt as might be supposed. Seldom do they qualify for the federally subsidized programs anyway. The fourth taken from the productive classes would be spent by them creating a plethora of jobs for those who wished to work and give them no excuse not to. The cycle of dependency would be drastically reduced. The federal government would no longer be an enabler to those not working. States would decide for themselves what assistance programs they could afford and generate with some states offering more and others less as the Tenth Amendment mandates.
One side benefit of tariffs is that it stimulates domestic production and industries giving them an advantage.
I have a friend who freely admits that he became a Democrat as a young man because they offered more. His departure from the Constitution began with that choice. The Democrat Party since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has always offered more freebies, confiscated from the “haves” and redistributed to the “have nots” to paraphrase Karl Marx and his socialist ideology.
So, how did we cover the expenses of the federal government—even wars—our first 124 years? Products coming into the country were assessed a fee to market in the U.S. called a tariff. We got product producers in other countries to cover our national expenses and thus we were able to spend on ourselves every cent of what the federal government now takes, which inadvertently stimulated the economy. No one should be able to argue that our present approximately $36 trillion national debt (up from $20 trillion just 8 years ago) is fair, has really worked for any of us, and is a better plan. It also enslaves our posterity who is required to pay it back amplified with interest charges, enabling us to bask in the sunshine of fake prosperity. Imagine what you could purchase annually with the money confiscated from you in federal taxes.
To protect prosperity and the Constitution for all, three things must happen. 1) We must identify and remove all waste and fraud in the present government identified by DOGE with ALL excess money from cancelled contracts to immediately be returned to liquidate the national debt. 2) We must remove the 16th Amendment and restore the tariff as our source of financing the federal government as it was our first 124 years. 3) We must return to Article I, Section 8 and the listed powers of government with ALL expenditures specifically tied to one of those powers. Yes this will hurt for a time, all surgeries do, otherwise we eventually self destruct as a free people.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution and a syndicated columnist. Read his weekly columns at www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column # 817
Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.
The Deep State knew that virtually none of their causes could be funded directly through the constitutional funding process, “All bills for raising revenue must begin in the House of Representatives,” because their shadow government is no way constitutional (U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 7). Congress does indeed raise the money under some general category, and a portion of it does go to the cause intended by them but too often much of it is actually laundered elsewhere as for example, hidden to the public, bio labs in Ukraine. Thus they created the USAID process now well known to fund their nefarious purposes. Hence, when Elon Musk, head of the Department of Government Efficiency reported, “Did you know that USAID, using YOUR tax dollars, funded bioweapon research, including COVID-19, that killed millions of people?” It shocked the nation.
A 2017 photograph inside a Wuhan China lab. The same thing was happening in the bio labs built by the DOD in Ukraine with like experiments to artificially induce evolution known as gain of function. The problem with this is that in order to preemptively create the vaccines and study the pathogens, scientists essentially have to first create a bio weapon in the lab making these pathogen infections to humans. Creating killer viruses to humans that could escape the lab, as happened with COVID-19, is a crime against humanity and should merit the death penalty.
By way of review we now know that the USAID takes the money and when possible gives it to well connected Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs), they place it into a DAF (Donor-Advised Funds) to fund other NGOs. Reportedly, the Deep State can fund any cause they like, and do, without ANY further Congressional approval or real oversight.
One presumed member of the DOGE team, (pseudo named DataRepublican), explained it this way, “It’s important to understand that funding is fungible, meaning USAID dollars do not directly flow into these NGOs in a literal sense. Instead, the money moves through multiple layers, with various entities handling, and re-distributing it. For example, CEPPS [The Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening] receives substantial USAID funds for global initiatives, but ultimately channels much of it to partisan NGOs, rather than focusing solely on individual grants. It’s more important to recognize the pattern of funding distribution influence. Donor Advised Funds (DAF) are a big part of the equation” (X22 Report-hereafter not cited, Ep. 3565b, Feb. 6, 2025, 30:10). Eventually it goes through enough layers, diffused and reduced sufficiently (laundered) enough to go into favored individuals shell accounts as payoffs without being easily detected.” Is this how and why so many in government with public servant salaries became millionaires? (See, “Who is Receiving ‘Kick Backs’ from Non Government Organizations,” LibertyUnderFire.org, Feb. 19, 2025).
We go to Clandestine, an investigative reporter, for how this happened respecting taxpayers funding of COVID-19 as Elon Musk made known. In Deep State circles it was called PROJECT PREDICT. “Now that the world is keen to the USAID, it’s time to go over the big secret they are desperate to keep from the public—Project Predict. This is the USAID funded project that led to the creation of SARS-Covid-2 and the Covid pandemic. This is what Elon was alluding to.
“USAID PREDICT began in 2009, was carried out in 30 countries around the globe, and was supposed to be a means to preemptively stop pandemics from zoonotic diseases, jumping from animal to human. The concept was to artificially induce evolution, or enhance the function of naturally existing pathogens like bird flu, bat coronaviruses and study them, and have vaccines prepared should one of these viruses mutate in the wild and jump to humans. The problem with this system is that in order to preemptively create the vaccines and study the pathogens, scientists essentially have to create a bio weapon in the lab when making these pathogen infections to humans; also known as gain of function or direct evolution. The projects core replicating partners are USAID, EcoHealth Alliance, UC Davis, MetaBiota, Hunter Biden, Wild Life Consortium Society, [and the] Smithsonian Institute.
Map shows 15 bio labs locations in Ukraine most, if not all, built by the U.S. Department of Defense. Elon Musk, head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) reported, “Did you know that USAID, using YOUR tax dollars, funded bioweapon research, including COVID-19, that killed millions of people?” “One of the partner organizations that receive[d] funding to carry out this project, MetaBiota, a bio lab company, was funded by Hunter Biden’s Rosemont Seneca. The owner, CEO, and head virologist behind MetaBiota, is Nathan Wolfe, who, in addition to the Biden’s, is financially tied to the Clinton’s and Epstein accomplants, Ghislaine Maxwell.”
“One of the partner organizations that receive[d] funding to carry out this project, MetaBiota, a bio lab company, was funded by Hunter Biden’s Rosemont Seneca. The owner, CEO, and head virologist behind MetaBiota, is Nathan Wolfe, who, in addition to the Biden’s is financially tied to the Clinton’s and Epstein accomplants, Ghislaine Maxwell via project TerraMar. Wolfe calls himself Virus Hunter, and wrote the book The Viral Storm: The Dawn of a New Pandemic Age, 2011, which he predicted that [the] future would be fraught with pandemics, and the only way to prevent it is to give him millions of dollars to look for Zoonotic diseases to produce vaccines….
“But everything changed in 2014. After the Obama CIA/State Dept. took over Ukraine via color revolution, MetaBiota was awarded their USAID/DOD contracts to begin searching for bat coronavirus and operating labs in Ukraine via Project PREDICT. All of this is open source information required by law and is available on USA Spending Government page.”
So Clandestine asks, “What does this all mean? It means that a Clinton, Epstein, and Biden-affiliated neurologist, was given tens of millions of US tax dollars via USAID, to look for, and genetically enhance bat coronaviruses in Ukraine, right before a man-made bat coronavirus started a global pandemic and killed millions of people… And we have emails from Hunter’s laptop proving that Hunter was in extremely close contact with Nathan Wolfe and MetaBiota. None of this is conjecture, and is backed up by a paper trail.”
This is the big secret. “The ruling families of the DNC are financially involved in USAID (CIA) projects that were enhancing bat coronaviruses before the C-19 pandemic, and they went great lengths to cover this up. This is ultimately where the road ends. The Deep State created C-19 with US taxpayer dollars and they are guilty of crimes against humanity. That is why Fauci and NIH covered up that Covid was man-made. That is why the Dems, the main stream media, censored, smeared anyone who would talk about C-19 being man-made. That’s why the Biden regime sent hundreds of billions of dollars to Ukraine. That is why Hunter and Fauci’s pardons begin in 2014. That is why the Dems are panicking that Trump is auditing the USAID because they are implicated in crimes against humanity, and Trump and Elon have the paper trail to prove it” (Ep.3563b, Feb.4, 2025, 35:00). These same people hid ivermectin, hydroxychoriquin, and natural immunity as cures. It’s now all exposed.
Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution and a syndicated columnist. Read his weekly columns at www.LibertyUnderFire.org Column #809. Help preserve our Republic while we still can by sharing this column.
