Constitutional Tender Act

Centinel

Centinel

Tenther
Most of those wishing to eliminate the federal reserve focus on the federal government and a federal solution. In other words, they look to congress for a solution.

I recently ran across an initiative called the Constitutional Tender Act. that seeks to introduce sound money at the state level.

Here’s a good synopsis of the initiative

The United States Constitution declares, in Article I, Section 10, "No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts". This means that no State can make something besides gold or silver a "tender in payment" (which means they cannot "make something else an offer as payment") for any debts, which would include debts owed by and to the State. However, EVERY State in the United States of America HAS made some other "Thing" an offer as payment - they have by law declared that they will accept, and pay out, Federal Reserve Notes for any debts owed by or to them. Therefore, every State is in violation of Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. Thus the need for the "Constitutional Tender Act" -- a bill template that can be introduced in every State legislature in the nation, returning each of them to adherence to the United States Constitution's actual legal tender provisions.
Click to expand...

There is little room for interpretation here. The constitution is clear: “No state shall”. Not much getting around that.

I find the idea intriguing. Given the fact that the states are in blatant violation of the constitution, it would seem difficult to argue against.
 
If that's what the constitution says, the constitution is dumb. An idiotic thing is idiotic, it doesn't suddenly become non-idiotic just because the constitution states the idiocy. People who wish to re-introduce the gold standard are idiots.
 
Last edited:
Libertardians think that they can just come up with their own random interpretation of the constitution and unilaterally impose their destructive and evil ideas upon the poeple of the United States. There is a method for dealing with things like this - the Supreme Court. Your arguments are apparently so well developed that you can't even argue it succesfully in front of the SC? Fucking lunatics. Libertarians will destroy the United States.
 
The constitution specifically forbids states from coining money. You edited the constitution! Stop trying to destroy my country, you evil piece of shit!

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
Click to expand...
 
Watermark Tzu said:
You're an idiot.
Click to expand...

So I've been told.

Watermark Tzu said:
If that's what the constitution says, the constitution is dumb. An idiotic thing is idiotic, it doesn't suddenly become non-idiotic just because the constitution states the idiocy. People who wish to re-introduce the gold standard are idiots.
Click to expand...

If you think that the constitution is dumb, then you are perfectly free to engage in the political system and amend it. Until it is amended, it is the supreme law of the land. You are also free to leave these united states for a place governed by a less dumb law.

Watermark Tzu said:
Libertardians think that they can just come up with their own random interpretation of the constitution and unilaterally impose their destructive and evil ideas upon the poeple of the United States. There is a method for dealing with things like this - the Supreme Court. Your arguments are apparently so well developed that you can't even argue it succesfully in front of the SC? Fucking lunatics. Libertarians will destroy the United States.
Click to expand...

I'm not a libertarian. I'm a constitutionalist and a liberal. But enough about me.

You mention a random interpretation of the constitution. I am not talking about an interpretation. The constitution clearly says that no state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment. Can you interpret this in any other way than that states must use gold or silver coin to make and accept payments? I'd be willing to hear your argument.

Also, I don't wish to impose anything on the people of the united states. I am concerned with my commonwealth of pennsylvania, and its adherence to the constitution. People in other states are free to make their own choices. I don't see why the US supreme court would be involved with this, as there are no cases on this subject to my knowledge. Do you know of any rulings by the federal judiciary regarding whether or not states must comply with this clause of the constitution?

Nor do I see how such an initiative would destroy the united states. If you see some inherent danger to sound money, please put it forth. I am willing to accept that I may be wrong in my goals.

Watermark Tzu said:
The constitution specifically forbids states from coining money. You edited the constitution! Stop trying to destroy my country, you evil piece of shit!
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of the prohibition on states coining money. I am not suggesting, nor does the constitutional tender act propose that states coin any money. The act, if passed by a state, would require that states treasurer to USE coin as a tender in payment. The legislation specifies that US gold and silver coins, which are legal tender be used. It would forbid the use of federal reserve notes, since these are not silver or gold coin.

And I assure you that I have no intention of destroying your country. I am only concerned that my commonwealth conform with the constitution. Unless you live in Pennsylvania, I don't think we have any conflict at all.

Watermark Tzu said:
We should amend the constitution to make the federal reserve a permanent government entity.
Click to expand...

That is an option. Best of luck with that.

Return of Dune said:
While I agree with your decimation of Centinal'a argument, why do you hold the Fed in such high esteem?
Click to expand...

He decimated my argument? He killed every tenth man of it?
 
If you want me to debate you, start a seperate post with your response to me.

decimatedpast participle, past tense of dec·i·mate (Verb)

[TABLE="class: ts"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 80"]Verb:[/TD]
[TD][TABLE="class: ts"]
[TR]
[TD]
  1. Kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of.
  2. Drastically reduce the strength or effectiveness of (something): "plant viruses that can decimate yields".
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
More info »Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary

Watermark is correct; you are an idiot.
 
Centinel said:
You are quite possibly right.

However, do you have any arguments against states complying with the constitution that you'd like to share?
Click to expand...

There isn't even a starting point.

Further, you don't seem to realise that I am thoroughly oposed to the Fed.
 
Return of Dune said:
There isn't even a starting point.
Click to expand...

No chink in the armor to be found, eh?

Further, you don't seem to realise that I am thoroughly oposed to the Fed.
Click to expand...

My clairvoyant skills are a little rusty of late. I can only know what you oppose or support if you tell me.

I also oppose the fed. My reason is that it continually debases the money, effectively stealing the wealth of the poor and middle class and initiating massive transfers of wealth to Wall Street.
 
Centinel said:
My clairvoyant skills are a little rusty of late. I can only know what you oppose or support if you tell me.

I also oppose the fed. My reason is that it continually debases the money, effectively stealing the wealth of the poor and middle class and initiating massive transfers of wealth to Wall Street.
Click to expand...

This would have been a clue; "why do you hold the Fed in such high esteem?"

I oppose the Fed for completely different reasons, those you mention are but minor symptoms.



I
 
Return of Dune said:
Hardly. You have no argument at all.
Click to expand...

My argument is quite simple. The constitution flatly states that no state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment. This is a simple fact. What is there with which for you argue. Are you claiming that the constitution does not say this? Or that we should ignore certain parts of the constitution?

Federal always supercedes State.
Click to expand...

This is a factually incorrect statement. The constitution clearly says that it is the constitution, and any law made pursuant to the constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. All federal laws do not qualify, only those made pursuant to the constitution. For example, federal legislation that, say, extended the presidents term of office to 10 years would be contrary to the constitution and would not have the force of law.

Thus, for you to issue the blanket statement that all federal legislation supersedes state legislation is wrong.

Fed reserve note are legal tender for all debts.
Click to expand...

By what authority is this so? Based on the constitution I'm reading, I see no power granted to congress that allows it to establish a legal tender. Perhaps you could point out such power to me.

You are just wrong on so many levels, it is not worth discussing.
Click to expand...

My assertion is that the proposed legislation is legitimate since it is made pursuant to the constitution. You have failed to show me why it is not.

I also assert that not every federal law is valid. Only those made pursuant to the constitution are valid. Furthermore, there is no constitution power granted to congress to make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts. I am willing to be shown where this grant of power exists, but I doubt it will be found.
 
Do you believe the Constitution can be ammended?

I can't be bothered with the rest of your word salad.
 
Centinel said:
My argument is quite simple. The constitution flatly states that no state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment. This is a simple fact. What is there with which for you argue. Are you claiming that the constitution does not say this? Or that we should ignore certain parts of the constitution?
Click to expand...

The states aren't making anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment, the US government is.


Centinel said:
By what authority is this so? Based on the constitution I'm reading, I see no power granted to congress that allows it to establish a legal tender. Perhaps you could point out such power to me.
Click to expand...

Did you read Article I, Section 8, Clause 5?


Centinel said:
My assertion is that the proposed legislation is legitimate since it is made pursuant to the constitution. You have failed to show me why it is not.

I also assert that not every federal law is valid. Only those made pursuant to the constitution are valid. Furthermore, there is no constitution power granted to congress to make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts. I am willing to be shown where this grant of power exists, but I doubt it will be found.
Click to expand...

The aforementioned section grants Congress the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.
 
David St. Hubbins said:
The states aren't making anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment, the US government is.
Click to expand...

And where in the constitution is listed congress' power to make anything at all a tender in payment? The states never granted the US government the power to establish a forced tender. The union has a limited set of powers. The power to make anything a tender in payment is not among them.

Did you read Article I, Section 8, Clause 5? The aforementioned section grants Congress the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.
Click to expand...

Okay, so congress has the power to mint coins and to make their value regular. Nobody is disputing that power. They continue to mint money into coin form even now, with their production of gold and silver eagles.

But congress does not have the power to make anything a tender in payment of debts, which means that they can't force the states to use anything but coin as a tender.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top