SOJ 51
In October of 1941, the State of Jefferson seeds were sown. Californians in the northern portion of the state, too many miles from Sacramento as well as southern Oregonians, too far from Salem, felt they were under-represented and unheard in Washington DC. In November of 1941, they organized a road block on Route 99 with the purpose to distribute the proposed new state’s “Proclamation of Independence.” But for the next month’s bombing of Pearl Harbor, those early secessionists might have changed the look of the Pacific North West.
75 years on, the move never died. It has, in fact, picked up an impressive head of steam. California resident Mark Baird, appearing on the Tom Woods Show spoke about the State of Jefferson. I’ve contacted people in Oregon who have been involved with the SOJ51 movement for some while and agreed to share their information with me. Judy Mathat and Bob Chard answered some questions. Bob’s answers are below Judy’s.
What would the population of Jefferson be?
Judy: The last estimate I heard was that it would be around 1 million and that would be about the size population of Idaho, I think that figure may be changing as some of the other California counties that may try to join in adding their hefty populations are, i.e. Stanislaus, Fresno, Madeira, Mariposa for a few that showed interest. Including the other 15 counties in Oregon would also add to the mix but not as much except that Bend, Baker, Redmond, Pendleton, Ontario, Milton Freewater and their surrounding smaller communities would mostly add resources and land mass and not as much population as the California counties.
Bob: Referencing the map on the back of the brochure, there are 1.7 million in the 21 CA counties and 1.1 Million in the 22 OR counties for a total sum of 2.8 million. That’s assuming all of those counties join in, as each county decides for themselves. In comparison, CA has 39 million and OR has 4.1 million now.
As a new state-crafted from the frustration of the current systems delineation of representation-will Jefferson just jump into the very pool from which we crawled out?
Judy: The simple and most important answer is: “We the People.” My hope is that with the success of the State of Jefferson and all the years of hard work to get there by many aware and devoted residents to less government, lower taxation and equal representation will provide representatives to allow for the redirection at the ensuring Constitutional Convention back to our original Constitution’s principles founded by this nations forefathers. That body’s work will set the course to either stay or stray and the future will be destined from there on for those of us who were given our nation by our forefathers, where those who became apathetical and then ignorant of the slippery slope by electing those who were not interested in the principles of Liberty and Freedoms necessary to maintain those precious unalienable rights that got us here today. First the governing bodies in the counties that will be primary to each counties success or failure, must purge those who did not support Jefferson by their elections (they should be concentrating on this now for all elected positions). They will form their lives and futures based on how they can keep them on track through their elective process and their economic decisions for using their resources and growing their lands. Inciteful [sic] and purposeful directives to not only see the present but to look beyond the horizon to a future based on keeping the principles of Jefferson and the growth of their governed lands and organizations and services will determine their success or failure not to return and jump back into the frying pans of Money Power and Greed.
Like minds will be guided by the need for revisiting supportive rules of law that have been on the books for decades and removing repetitive or unnecessary ones. Reallocation of resources and a part time legislature would hopefully defer that from reoccurring for many generations. All that will depend on the counties and their elective bodies and their handling of their resources, income and educational curriculum from the parents who elect their school boards and administrative support for their schools.
The planning departments of each county and adjoining counties that allow developers and corporations to infiltrate the general plans of growing their undeveloped open areas for future business and residential growth are key to keeping abuse and fraud out of the state. Willy-nilly plop it anywhere is a danger to recreating the pool we will be jumping out of and there are definitely many eyes on the prize to grow the economy at the expense of the citizens that want to be the directives of their destinies. I believe in the right to use private property for private gain and purpose but the infrastructure is necessary to develop and maintain any growth even if it is nothing more than new recreational developments.
Bob: I have attached my paper [see below this article] I wrote after taking John Chambers’ “Constitutional Studies” class. You need to read it first, as it explicitly explains why we have no representation. SOJ51 will fix that situation, as explained in the last question. The State of Jefferson is filled with Constitutionaly minded folks, and want to form the new state government so that “We the People” have more control, and it is not “We the Government”. They are cognizant of the failings of the present system that allows polticians to ignore the “Government Owners Manual” – the Constitution – and are working to correct that shortcoming. For instance, I proposed to them that the “Oath Takers” should have at least read that Owners Manual. My proposal was that: they have to take a test on the Constitution and pass it at a 70% rate, or they can’t take office until they do pass that test.
Does the Jefferson think-tank have an idea of how the state will be different than the other 50 aside from being the newest?
Judy: First off Jefferson would be run like the original states declarations of formation without the Federal government owning any lands or maintaining them under a federal agency, other than those provided for under the Constitution and will retain control over public lands through the county Sheriff’s in which they exist, except for those National Parks which are part of the treasures of the entire nation.
I really cannot speak for any of the hard working “think tank” members, their thoughts and ideas are well documented on the official web site at SOJ51.org, but I do align many of my personal beliefs with what I have heard them propose.
Primarily Jefferson will serve as a path for the approximately 30 other states who [sic] want to separate from their one man one vote population centers without equal representation in the rural areas of their counties to move forward with the same path for the return of their Liberties and Freedom.
No National Guard, a state militia where everyone age specific will open carry and will be responsible for the protection of their state and the Sheriff is the official law enforcement official of each county and their public lands.
The budgets to provide road maintenance except for Federally maintained Interstate highways and other services would be decided at the county level without state intervention and the state would transfer funds to the counties before paying the taxes designed for them to the Federal government.
Unpaid senators and representatives will draw per diem and expenses provided during their part time legislative service to implement the budget, and create new legislation and remove old laws that are no longer necessary and will serve under term limits to be decided at the Constitutional Convention.
Bob: The biggest difference will be that we will be conservative, constitutionally minded and want a smaller state government. The legislators will only meet for 90 days/year and each legislator will only be able to submit one bill per year.
Another big difference, is that we will have the unique opportunity of evoking the ‘Equal Footing Doctrine’ in our state’s Enabling Act. The original 13 Colonies, when they created the Unites States, realized that there would, most likely, be more states join the new union, from the vast empty lands to the west. Of course, they were right. So, they discussed among themselves, shall we admit them as equals to us, or lessor than us? After discussion, they decided to bring them in as equals.
So, how many acres of BLM [Bureau of Land Management] land are situated in any of the original 13 states? The answer is – there is none in any of them! So, when we become a new state, we can come in with the same status as they have – no BLM lands within our borders! They will become State of Jefferson lands and now be under local control. The Forest Service Lands will most likely come right along with BLM lands. Those are called ‘Public Lands’ and are actually supposed to be given to the states when they ask for them. Utah actually did ask for them. The legislative body voted for the “Federal Lands Transfer Act” and the governor signed it, to be effective December 31, 2014. They submitted it to the feds and guess what kind of an answer they got? None! They were totally ignored, once again. Utah is going to sue in the Supreme Court no later than December 1, 2017. However, Congressionally designated parks and wilderness areas will stay in fed control.
That seems to be the standard that the governments use. They ignore and then you have to sue and exhaust your fortune just fighting them in court. That is one thing that will not happen in SOJ state government, because the state will not be able to spend the people’s money defending itself against the people.
Is Jefferson interested in leading from behind? That is, as the most recent state, will Jefferson endeavor to push for the concepts of the 10th Amendment-state’s rights-and nullification of un-Constitutional laws and work to extricate itself from the federal government?
Judy: I believe that there are many states just waiting in the wings that will not have to re-establish their identity. Jefferson will provide the path for them to return to their goals of equal representation.
Bob: The following is just an idea, and may not be utilized.
As for federal taxes, the citizens will fill out their tax forms and send the money owed — to the State of Jefferson. SOJ is acting as an intermediary. There is a reason I use that word – intermediary. SOJ is putting itself between [the] citizens and the feds. Here’s why. We also want to reduce the size of the federal government. So, we look at the Constitution and point out to the feds that they are supposed to be a small entity, as the forefathers intended, and so we will only send them the money as authorized in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution (which may be only 5-10% of what they ask for). There are 18 clauses in there that state what the feds can do. The 10th Amendment reinforces the state powers. Now, this may work only once – before they send in the troops, but it may be worthwhile, as a notice to the other states that we know the method to reduce the size of the federal government.
Mark Baird has remarked that the under-representation has been seen more vividly in the poor road conditions south of Salem. Extending that the better represented counties have better services, might we see Jefferson as an example of how private enterprise can fill the needs and services that state government otherwise would have?
Judy: I see a sharing of resources between individual counties using their resources to improve their roads and infrastructure without Jefferson having to prop them up every time there is a loss or event necessary to bring in extra services and support. This is currently never more evident than the current Harvey and Irma disasters. National and state and local governments will decide what is needed to provide those caught without insurance and support for losses will be addressed in our new Constitution’s, codes and covenants. Private and public contractors will need to start working together. Private industry will have an easier path to success. Public Private partnerships will be more normal and collective bargaining will not be halting the development of a county approved project for scores of overbearing regulatory.
What can you tell me of the system of taxation for Jefferson?
Judy: The use of sales taxes instead of property and income taxes have been proposed to form a financial model based on existing data. I am a poor mathematician but do understand budgetary balances. The reality that for a while there will be a few “red” counties that will be underwater and need some state assistance until their resources can be utilized to support them again is depicted in the web site model. Also, many young people claim that they do not have to pay income taxes and they attend college, rent and do not own property so sales taxes would be unfair to them. The obvious answer is if students are attending college and do not own property or have income sufficient to achieve ownership or employment where that would be worthwhile to them is: Where do they live? Their landlords are certainly passing the property taxes on to their tenants and they must not be expecting their education to provide a career that will employ them to have an income that will be above the poverty level and owe income taxes.
No system is perfect but sales taxes are probably the most equitable form of taxation as the wealthy amongst us will pay their fair share based on what they can afford and where the poorest will barely pay anything as purchases other than food some essentials (supposedly not taxed) will be rare. Not sure about gasoline taxes but that is built in now and would be a discussion well worth entering.
Bob: There would be no property tax. The reason we want to get away from a property tax, is that the government can take your property away from you if you stop paying that tax. So, we want to take that ability away from the government! There will be no state income tax. So, how do we fund government? We have a sales tax. A sales tax is a fair tax. I have not heard about whether food and medicine would be exempt, but it normally is. The percentage of that tax is still being worked on, but here is something you need to know – the state government will be much smaller. For instance, CA currently has 547 state agencies, which far surpasses the feds, at 331. OR has only 130, in comparison. We will bring agencies down to about 50 in the new state. There will be no Welfare Department, for instance. Service organizations and churches will take care of those folks, just like it used to be, before big government. One more thing, the percentage of the sales tax will not be subject to the legislative body to increase. Only the people can vote on it. And that is how the people control the size of government – they control the purse strings!
You have previously made an observation to me that, in particular, the culinary industry would have many employment opportunities. Do we see Jefferson as a place where minimum regulations on food will exist? Recall that last week a hot dog vendor in CA was cited for vending without a permit and the officer took the vendor’s cash. Can residents plan on Jefferson being supportive of so-call cottage food vendors?
Judy: I believe they already are as far as Klamath Falls is concerned. The amount of food trucks and vendors at intersections and Farmers Markets and food stands extends far beyond this county and many many miles of Jefferson are lined with farm produce and small property owners providing their wares. I do not know how each county uses their environmental management services to allow for those selling to the public but have not seen or heard of the government shutting down the above for other than blatant offenses for cleanliness or other issues of origination of products being sold through their registers. I expect the counties to maintain their regulations and inspections to protect their residents. I could imagine the state having an agriculture department that amongst several other responsibilities assists counties in setting basic standards of cleanliness, inspection of imports etc.
Where there is economic growth, the opportunity for varied and a wide variety of restaurants and competition is always the case. I must say that my experience comes from a son who was a banquet server and waiter in his younger life as an original employee in San Francisco’s Ritz Carleton and later the Park Hyatt. He offered that: in that crazy magical strange city by the bay one could start dining three meals a day out and never in a lifetime eat at all the businesses available up and down the peninsula from Sausalito to the Palo Alto city line as that is a place where many are opened and if they do not provide good service and fare that the competition will soon fill the void as newer and more interesting offerings are produced in the culinary ventures of worldwide fare.
I want to bring up a point about no corporate tax. That sounds great for businesses, but how would Jefferson be funded?
Judy: See the above explanation about the use of sales taxes that are not a favorable issue for some uninformed Oregonians that are averse to Jefferson for that reason alone.
In addition to corporate tax, you wrote me that no corporate tax “will be key to those wanting to increase industries and businesses that will thrive with the services necessary to support them.” As a new state, will Jefferson nullify the federal minimum wage laws and allow businesses to determine their own rates of pay?
Judy: No corporate income taxes would allow for the increase of existing businesses to add expansion and then more employment opportunities and with the regulated use of resources, i.e. timber, mining, natural gas and thermal and heat mining as most of Jefferson lays within a large source for those products I do not see over riding a federal minimum wage to be a factor as economic increases would provide existing and new businesses opportunities and may even bring out the “headhunters”.
How would the creation of Jefferson affect land which is state owned and run as a business? I am thinking specifically of Oregon Institute of Technology. I can imagine the State of Oregon having strong feelings about surrendering the school or land.
Judy: My understanding is that existing contracts will be upheld under the law and will provide the basis for existing agreements that will only be negotiable after and if the contracts expire. This especially was a consideration for California’s underfunded PERS [Public Employees’ Retirement System] and other retirement systems. All infrastructure within the state boundaries will belong to the new state as the residents have already paid taxes to build and maintain them. Infrastructure, like prisons and universities and other institutions, will certainly be a major factor in the process of reformation and division of assets. This is a negotiating process that will be initiated after the request for separation is made necessary and successful. I also over-heard the specific question in regard to some of the existing state universities in CA and that there is an opportunity for working to share services between existing state campus’ especially in regard to residency and tuition expense. Perhaps there would be a similar opportunity for discussion with all educational institutions within a newly formed state and their previous support structures. I do know that the Jeffersonian model would not allow for some of the disruption to classes and campus’ that exist in the very liberal denial of allowing conservative voices to even be heard. All that would be done under the Constitutional Convention and codes and covenants.
Bob: When CA was thinking of splitting up into 5 different states 30 or 40 years ago, the attorneys looked at the issue of ‘What happens to the infratructure?’. They concluded that the people in those separate areas paid their fair share of taxes, so they should be able to claim all the roads, bridges, schools, municipal buildings and even the truck and road grader in the local state highway department equipment yard.
How long would the transition take? What of the people who wish to have no part of Jefferson? Will they have to move, sell their homes, pull their kids out of school, get new jobs? That is a lot and some, many, might resent the imposition.
Judy: I do not know the actual timeline for this process since 1941 was the last viable opportunity for Jefferson and before that we have West Virginia and Virginia and Pennsylvania and that was a long process to be finalized to where it is today. The process after the separation to form a new state is approved will require a Constitutional Convention where affected declared counties will send several elected and appointed representatives to work towards forming a new Constitution for the new state. Several outlines will be available to jump-start the process though none may look like the completed document. There are many state constitutions that would work as a foundation for Jefferson. Then there are many committees that representatives will have to work on and work hard to move the government forward. My knowledge of the hows and wherefores are yet limited to have been working on some of the California committees but I would suggest that the use of existing documents to review and reform will make the process much easier than our forefathers as social media and go to meeting and other electronic instantaneous devices will allow for a faster track to get Jefferson up and running!! By the way, the residents will vote for the name of the new state and the flag and other variables that to date history has afforded the name Jefferson and the double crossed green and gold and black gold pan insignia and flag.
I moved to Rocky Point, Oregon along Klamath Lake, leaving behind 8 generations and a legacy and relationships from the Sierra Gold Country and Gold Rush Era. Though believing Jefferson would become a reality for Northern California and Southern Oregon I was not sure it would become that during my lifetime and I chose to make the change to live where I felt I wanted to spend the last years of my life on this planet because of many factors. Not the least of which was that I am too old to take on Alaska or Montana and the other places where I have driven over 36,000 miles in the past 6 years full time in our RV has shown me many things and many places and my love of this little niche in this beautiful state and yet to be discovered beauty will last the rest of my life. I also am very glad to have good highways to drive on and resources that make life easier the older one gets. The friendliness and helpful good-natured residents compare only to those I found in Southern states towards implants and tourists. Those who have spent their lives here are very fortunate to have done so and I believe that the boundary lines of a new state will not change the bounty of those lives as to the ability to live in a land where Liberty and Freedom are more important than any political party or government that controls or subverts the above two greatest alienable rights given us by our Constitution of the USA, where I have seen her flag flying from any conceivable location in all sizes and mediums and configurations, why move? Jefferson will not be a new state but a return to what the entire United States of America was intended to be in the first place.
Bob: I do not know the actual timeline for this process either, but there indeed are folks who believe that more government is better than greater personal liberties. They will have to decide for themselves what they want to do. But, on the other hand, there will be a lot of folks who will want to move to the State of Jefferson because of our smaller government stance and strong constitutional values.
The transition would come first through California that must succeed. This is the most significant misunderstanding that most Oregonians need to grasp. When California succeeds and after attending the first hearing on the lawsuit on the 8th of Sept. I am more certain it will, then and only then will Oregon be able to ask to even attempt to join in and not until those counties that have declared to the government in Salem through one of two processes by first asking for equal representation like Californians did in Sacramento on January 6, 2016 will they be able to ask to separate from Oregon and become Jeffersonians.
What is the best way for people to learn more about SOJ51?
Judy: The main web site will direct most to areas to understand what this means and the history and to all the locations in California and recently in Oregon that are having meetings and events or booths and their working committees that needs volunteers (no one is paid to work for Jefferson, for Liberty or for Freedom). It has been a wild ride up to now and the goal is in sight for the first time in 76 years to form the 51st state and change this nation. Becoming a part of that is becoming a part of history and giving one’s family, friends and self the realization that one man, namely Mark Baird of Siskiyou County who decided over 4 years ago has led thousands to make a decision to find out more, to join in and work for Liberty, for Freedom.
To those who are uncertain as to whether this can or will happen have been overheard over and over by those who understand that it will only fail if we do not continue to move forward and make it so. SOJ51.org and on Facebook the county pages are available for those users too.
This is the paper Bob referred to in the opening paragraphs.
States Rights/Powers
March, 2016
I get regular emails from my state representatives. The most common theme is: the Willamette Valley controls the Senate, House and Governorship, and we can’t do anything to stop them!
I believe I may shed some light on this predicament.
In the 1787 Constitutional Convention, the major sticking point was that the larger (most populated) states wanted to have a strictly popular form of representation while the least populated states wanted the states represented. In either case, the winner of that argument would control the new government. Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman proposed that we have a Senate with 2 senators each to represent the states (satisfying the smaller states) and the House of Representatives apportioned per population (satisfying the larger states). That was approved with Benjamin Franklin’s Origination Clause, in that the House initiated all money bills. See Utah Senator Mike Lee’s 2015 book, Our Lost Constitution, for the full story.
This bicameral system of government, a Constitutional Republic, was such a successful concept, that nearly every state adopted the same type of constitution: a House of Representatives apportioned by population and a Senate representing Counties. The concurrence of both least populated and the most populated areas would be required for a law to be made. This is a staple of the mixed form of government described by Polybius and formed by the Romans as a Republic (Res Publica “thing of the people”).
However, in 1964, The Supreme Court decided a case originating in Alabama, Reynolds v. Sims (377 U.S. 533). It would transform 30 states from a republican form of government (as required in the Constitution, see below) into a democratic form of government in which a majority of the people make the laws.
Reynolds v. Sims righted a wrong in which apportionment in Alabama’s House of Representatives, supposed to occur every 10 years, had not been done since the year 1900. This was apparently a racial issue purposefully done to deny a certain population representation. The Court was correct to rectify this “error” but Chief Justice Earl Warren went a step too far. He wrote that the Equal Protection Clause, “one man, one vote” requires equal legislative representation for all citizens, even in the Senate. His ruling forced the Senate to also be apportioned by population. Both houses represented the same interests. The Republic was drowned in a sea of Democracy.
In dissent, Justice John Marshall Harlan II criticized the Court, claiming it was imposing its own idea of “good government” on the states. Harlan further claimed that if Reynolds was correct, the U.S. Constitution’s own provision for two senators from each state would be constitutionally suspect. If it was to be for the states, it should also be for the federal government.
Historically, there is no evidence that the term Equal Protection applied to political questions, like how a government chooses to allocate representatives.
The Supreme Court cannot write laws or amend the Constitution. I submit that this ruling unlawfully amended the constitution of the 30 states that modeled their constitution after the federal standard, taking away their rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 4 “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of Government.”
It can’t get much clearer than that, and that is reinforced by the 10th Amendment “The powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”. So, our Republican form of state government was taken away and replaced with a democratic form of government. We no longer have a rule by law, but a rule by men.
A quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin “A democracy is where two wolves and a lamb vote upon what to have for dinner”.
This changed the political climate so much that rural areas of states are no longer represented. The State of Jefferson movement in California is based upon this exact notion, as they feel that their votes do not count, as whatever Los Angeles & San Francisco votes for, happens. They contend that LA County has 11 Senators, while 11 Northern Counties have only 1 Senator. The same situation prevails in Oregon (page 135 of the Oregon Blue Book). Senate District 29 in Eastern Oregon has 1 Senator for 6 ½ counties and District 30, also in Eastern Oregon, has 1 Senator to represent 7 ½ counties. Multnomah County has 9 Senators fully or partially representing that county.
I propose that we do one of two actions:
1) Litigate to overturn this ruling. We could probably get most rural counties in those 31 states to join in the suit.
2) Get a backbone and invoke states rights. We allowed this to happen in 1964 because the population was ignorant of the ramifications of the court overstepping their bounds, trampling on states choice of government.
Robert Chard
Grants Pass, OR 97527
bchard@charter.net
P.S. Thanks to John Chambers and his Constitution Studies Class, in which he enlightened me enough to enable me to write this paper, and to his editing skills.
