25 SEP 2017 · What Celebrities Don’t Understand About Their Protests Not being a celebrity (either in sports, entertainment, or social circles), my views on celebrity protests are filtered through our business principles and care for our customers as small business owners. Sports and entertainment industries are built on business enterprises catering to the wants of customers. Marketing is designed to attract as many as possible for profit and growth in their respective fields. They’re selling entertainment and we buy a lot of it. Celebrities see people as fans where we see our fans as customers we’re lucky to have shopping with us. Celebrities fail to see themselves, generally, as employees of the businesses, reliant on pleasing the customer base they attract or risk losing them to other options. Even the owners of sports, entertainment, and social businesses see themselves as somehow superior to their consumers, forgetting why people are paying their money to visit their teams or movies or other offerings. Although we respect the rights of our employees to participate politically in ways they choose, during our open hours when customers shop with us we don’t allow for political protests or statements such as kneeling when customers first walk in one of our stores. Our customers are not paying us so they can hear our views or witness our frustration in government through simple protests, even if only briefly at the beginning of their visit. When on the clock, we pay our employees to provide the best customer care, product knowledge, and passion for service possible for each person we’re lucky enough to have shop with us. Attendance and viewership is down for many celebrity enterprises simply due to their customers not enjoying the experience as much as they once did. If every time a celebrity went out to eat the staff first gave a political protest statement (whether in favor or opposed to the personal view of the celebrity) it would get old. Today every award show is an excuse to rant or protest, every opening ceremony a stage for some star to stand (or kneel) upon, every late night show and TV news hour has devolved to being less than what the customer wants to pay for to be entertained. We would not allow our employees to deliver this type of service to our customers yet many celebrities are insisting their customers get used to it until the government changes to their way of thinking. Entertaining? We’ll see where the customers continue to shop. In my view many celebrities are helping prepare for a massive, going out of business sale…to be held at empty coliseums around the country. What celebrities don’t understand about their protests is fans are consumers who still do have options for spending their limited entertainment dollars to be entertained in exchange.

25 MAR 2017 · Vaping is part of the solution, not part of the problem. It is a good adult decision, preventative in nature, and should be encouraged in place of smoking for those seeking alternatives. An 18 year old adult should not be criminally liable for vaping, period. Texas should not raise vaping to 21. Why treat vaping like smoking? Why allow discrimination against one nicotine alternative rather than all nicotine alternatives? Why create law enforcement challenges by criminalizing vaping? Answering these three questions we can begin to reach an agreement, vaping is not smoking and should be left at the current age restrictions. This can be done with a very simple amendment to current proposed legislation. You can read the complete transcript at: https://texasvapersadvocacy.info

20 MAR 2017 · We are seeing a rise in memes featuring our Pledge of Allegiance and The American's Creed, it's time we revisit their meanings, history, and impact on American Federalism. Are they a root challenge to restoring liberty over bureaucracy?

10 MAR 2017 · Find out why, after 45 years of smoking, I vape and why vaping needs your help. Can we share a common goal of living smoke-free? For a video and full transcript visit The Texas Vapers Advocacy Information Center https://texasvapersadvocacy.info/vaping-needs-help

22 FEB 2017 · Governments are crafting rules and bringing charges against vape shop owners sharing personal success about quitting cigarettes with vaping. Let that sink in! Our government silences vape shop owners in the United States of America. Government at all levels are participating, not just the federal, though they’re leading the charge. Despite experiencing personal success in quitting smoking through vaping, it is a violation for any vape shop owner to mention this fact publicly, in writing, in their stores, or in any forum consumers may hear their story. Think of a fitness guru founding a gym to support the exercise routine that works best for them and NOT being able to mention the routine anywhere. In the vaping industry many businesses are founded by former smokers who successfully, finally quit smoking through vaping. Their story led them to reach out to other smokers. Creating retail stores and manufacturing operations these vapers focused on helping people live smoke-free if they choose to. Making safer, more efficient delivery systems over the last decade, their passion led to improvements in quality, opportunity, and access for people seeking reliable, safe ways to quit smoking. Federal, state and local government stipulate any vape shop owner may be in violation of the new FDA Deeming Rules for sharing accurate information and personal success. FDAAccording to FDA guidelines and state level interpretations this confuses consumers, violating protection laws. Many state and local authorities, special interest groups, and lobbyists agree. If owners share their story with any consumer it can confuse the consumer since the FDA has not deemed Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) approved for smoking cessation. Since bureaucrats have not supported a link no link can be discussed. Vaping is merely another form of tobacco, like chewing and smoking. Vaping will be treated as tobacco according to current government guidelines. Sharing scientific research supporting safety and health through vaping, telling personal success stories, or giving guidance in the selection and use of vaping products potentially violates government standards and must not be done. When meeting people trying to end their addiction to cigarettes, chew, or other forms of tobacco vapers may violate rules by simply talking about vaping as a possible alternative. According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) business stakeholders cannot, in any way, provide details related to the obvious connection between an increase in vaping, decrease in smoking, and overall improvement in health among vapers who are former smokers. Public health is being positively impacted while bureaucracy and cronyism is not happy. Owner violations can happen in their stores, on websites, social media pages, or any other place a consumer may see, hear or read the information. People who share their stories can be accused of violating government regulations. They will face fines and criminal charges as the governing body bringing action sees fit. Should the owner challenge the findings a great deal of money, time, and effort will overwhelm most mom and pop stores who simply cannot survive the regulatory onslaught. Draconian as it may sound this is reality in the US. A Case in Vermont Reveals Penalties In Vermont the Attorney General went so far as to fine an owner $50,000 for his patrons leaving their success stories on his social media pages and for him sharing his success. The AG claims the owner should have removed them, you can’t make this up. By leaving them our vape shop owner was in violation of marketing guidelUS Surgeon Generalines under the FDA Deeming Rules and the Vermont AG’s understanding of those rules. “On January 31, 2017, in response to the AG’s investigation and increased regulation of the e-cigarette industry, Vermont Vapor announced that it will be closing its business and that the company’s owner plans to move out of the State. The very next day, the Vermont Attorney General’s Office delivered a proposed settlement agreement to Vermont Vapor that, among other things, would require the e-cig manufacturer to: Pay $50,000 in civil penalties to the State of Vermont; Admit to various alleged violations of the Vermont Consumer Protection Act; Cease and desist from: Making unsubstantiated testimonials and smoking cessation, health and safety claims; Providing free e-liquid samples; and Featuring certain “vaping Santa Claus,” “vaping Easter Bunny” and “vaping skeleton” yard inflatables at its retail location. Agree to liquidated damages of $10,000 for each future violation of the settlement agreement. Vermont Vapor has denied all wrongdoing and reiterated that it has chosen to close down rather than entertain the AG’s investigation and settlement proposal.” The owner went out of business and is leaving his state after six successful years helping people quit smoking. Why? He was sharing his actual, truthful experience with vaping and allowed his customers to do the same. None of them sounded confused about how vaping helped them. Not FDA Approved for Smoking Cessation The FDA has not approved vaping as a cessation product. Since the government has not ruled vaping can help people quit smoking it violates their governing rules to say it helps even when the mountain of scientific evidence and millions of testimonies show it does. Truth takes a serious backseat to rules designed by bureaucrats in DC. Big Tobacco Big PharmaHumans naturally share experiences. We actually rely on each other to alert to both good and bad experiences, today we commonly refer to these as ratings. The truth over this past decade is without question, vaping is far safer than smoking as well as safer than lozenges, patches and gum (easily available without extra tax or age restrictions and approved by the FDA for smoking cessation). Though Chantix is approved by the FDA many have had dangerous experiences, including attempted suicide. Nobody has attempted suicide through vaping yet Chantix can be publicized on TV by drug companies while vaping cannot be shared at all, anywhere or by anyone associated with the industry. People recommend vaping to friends and family. A community of former or transitioning smokers socialize, support, and celebrate those breaking free of burning or chewing tobacco. Vaping works for millions but somehow vape shop owners violate US governing regulations while living daily with this true reality, it works for them. Among other claims, sharing personal experiences while working in the industry can potentially confuse consumers. Smokers seeking a possible way to live smoke-free are left to dig on their own when it comes to the pros and cons of vaping despite it being 95% safer than smoking. Industry experts are there to help…whoops, that’s a violation. Why Should Silence Continue? Because it’s helping so many word is getting out despite the lies of government’s friends. Instead of celebrating smoking’s decline the FDA insists vaping is merely a tobacco product. Government Vapers Safer in UK vs USbureaucrats must denounce sound science and millions of success stories to maintain vaping is just as bad as smoking while leading youth to cigarettes; both emphatically disproved through medical science and a decade of user experiences. What should our government bureaucrats be saying? If you smoke try vaping, the science leaves no doubt. Vaping saves lives but…mums the word or you’ll violate the rules and confuse people protected by consumer laws. Government bureaucrats silence vape shop owners who dare share success from e-cigarettes and their modern day line-up of quality vaping products. Are we actually going to expect ex-smokers, regaining health through vaping, to silently sell devices and eLiquids without bursting with the joyful news regarding their personal success? Most business owners are driven to share success with others. How bad is that? Vape shop owners should not be silenced in sharing their success, should they? Should we insist any who share their experience be levied with civil penalties, Consumer Protection Act violations, and be required to cease and desist sharing their stories? Why is this overregulation fitting for the vape industry? Vaping saves lives, this is an indisputable fact and by stating it here I violate government rules. That’s okay, perhaps if enough of us do more smokers will be saved, public health will be improved, and bureaucrats and lobbyists will be forced to admit their rules do more to confuse and harm than vape shop owners telling their true stories. Government silences vape shop owners in the US but the truth sets our voices free from such governing tyranny.

2 FEB 2017 · A Crazy Way to Pay for Mental Health in Texas Texas Rep. Chris Turner (D – District 101) filed House Bill 1411 February 1st with a special interest, “…to fund grants for local law enforcement mental health staff; imposing taxes.” No doubt our law enforcement are faced with many challenging, dangerous situation with many connections to mental health problems experienced by those the police often deal with. This tax bill proposes to fund grants for contracted mental health staff positioned with police to assist with specific situations their expertise is deemed beneficial in. Taxes are monies taken from some people to pay for either shared needs or the needs of other people through force of law. It is a financial penalty assessed against property or the acquisition of property whether income tax, sales tax, countless fees, or “sin” tax. Some taxation is necessary for the general benefit of all. General needs should be assessed equally and paid from the general fund. The need for mental health staff, if agreed to be general in nature, would need to be properly funded through a retail sales tax increase applied equally, politicians hate raising sales taxes. Rep. Turner proposes imposing taxes specifically on those who vape to pay for a general need. Most vapers either are former smokers or those transitioning off cigarettes. Many who vape are working class families, military, veterans, and others who are attempting to live smoke-free, healthier lives. Most are not rich, nor are they the reason for an increase in local law enforcement’s need for contracted mental health staff. Police are not suddenly experiencing increased calls involving unstable, abusive, out-of-control vapers are they? Here are a few other quick questions Rep. Tuner, I hope you have time or staff to address them. Why are those attempting to live smoke-free through vaping being penalized and forced to pay for funding contracts granted to local law enforcement for mental health staff? If vapers are unable to pay or afford this imposed tax would the state prefer vapers return to smoking? If nicotine and vaping is somehow being connected with a dramatic increase in a specific need for mental health staff accompanying police where is the data to show this connection? Is nicotine the common denominator, not vaping? If so, where is the additional taxation imposed on nicotine patches, nicotine gum, eggplants, tomatoes and anything else with nicotine? Where is the proof nicotine results in an increase need in state contracted mental health staff? How are those vaping also sinning to a level a draconian "sin tax" is being proposed against the vaping community solely? There are many other questions regarding HB 1411 Rep. Turner needs to answer but if we start with these I believe the conversation can begin. The way this bill reads right now it is a blatant assault on a community, the vaping community, simply striving to live smoke-free, healthier lives while enjoying their life, liberty, and that pesky pursuit of happiness. At this point Rep. Turner, it sure appears to be a crazy way to pay for mental health in Texas.

28 NOV 2016 · Confidence in Trump has helped spark progressive protests out of a fear he will stop the fundamental transformation Obama helped press forward through phone and pen. Obama won on a promise to fundamentally transform the United States while Trump countered, 8 years later, with a promise of making America great again. The legacy of Obama will be tied to how successful Trump is at reversing many of the executive orders Obama used to push bureaucracy toward ultimate administrative rule in place of constitutional law. Based on the history of our modern progressive movement, Barrack Obama may go down in history, alongside FDR and LBJ, as being among the biggest champions of transforming bureaucracy into stronger administrative law across the country. During more than a century of progressive efforts FDR and LBJ pushed their agendas further than any other president before them. Through their New Deal and Great Society plans administrative law grew significantly while federal rules and regulations supplanted local government to near serf status and turned states into wards of the federal government when the states accepted their role. Obamacare, combined with the thousands of additional rules, regulations, and agreements implemented without congress, has created the largest bureaucracy in history with the largest federal debt ever. Bureaucracy can only be truly tamed when funding ceases and it is doubtful congressional passion runs deep enough to sever funding to the alphabet soup congress relies on for reelection and power. It is very likely many of Obama’s transformative efforts will survive a Trump administration, bureaus tend to survive political storms. President Obama is very busy as he presses toward the goal line of completing the transformation. Just this past week he led the efforts for implementing more pages of new regulations in a single day than any other day in U.S. history. He has been very honest in his focus toward supplanting the U.S. into a global community. Globalization is something long desired by the elite who seek bureaucracy over liberty around the world and progressive transformation embraces globalization. In his final European trip he spoke openly about his confidence in not moving the American people toward globalization too fast. Modern history agrees with his assessment and the 2016 election proves literally half the voting population embraces bureaucratic rule over constitutional order. So much passion is invested in supporting administrative law people willingly took to the streets and burned down fellow citizens’ businesses and property, attacked police, tied up traffic, created havoc for others, and demanded more government, not less. The call for more government is loud and election results locally prove progressives are far from finished with their desire and their need for on-going progressive transformation. In Bexar County, TX Clinton won more than 60% of the vote and liberals captured a majority of the positions they ran for locally. In cities, counties, and regions across the country it is easy to see Obama’s transformation is still desired by a growing number of people. Human nature always struggles between liberty and servitude. Bexar County is just one of hundreds filled with voters wanting federal government bureaucracy to continue. Many believe their special interests are served best by more government. The U.S. population is not overwhelmingly embracing freedom, we’re divided. Population shifts lean toward progressive success in the elections ahead, especially in urban centers. Servitude is emotionally safer than liberty. Liberty is scary and servitude comes with the promise of needs being taken care of where liberty puts the burden of care on the person, family, and local community. Trump cannot change the fear of liberty. If anyone is relying on Trump to restore greatness and champion liberty for our Posterity they are relying on a very thin possibility. People who still believe liberty and the pursuit of happiness should overrule bureaucracy and equality of things need to understand their plight. It will only become probable liberty will triumph over bureaucracy when decades of reductions take place in bureaucracy and American Federalism is taught to our children’s children. Liberty must again prove more alluring than servitude or the U.S. will be globalized out of existence and Obama’s legacy will be as secure as FDR’s and LBJ’s despite the costs and failures common with democracy and administrative law. Confidence in Trump will not stop progressive transformation, it will take a people focused on self-governing over bureaucratic rule; liberty over tyranny, a choice seldom made in human history.

7 NOV 2016 · Routing errors can cause real problems when traveling. Heading to your destination can be easy or complex depending on the route chosen. Getting off course, or making an error while in route creates delays, lost time, frustration, and increased expenses. Anyone who has done even a small amount of travelling has experienced problems derived from a routing error. What may look like a good route on a map quickly proves to be longer with less services and fewer ways to get help if needed. The 16th Amendment’s approval for a federal income tax gave federal government a direct route to the people’s earnings providing access to a lot of money. Money is the fuel for building a bureaucratic state. The 1929 stock market crash helped government sell the notion it needed to create federal agencies to help people, the problems are too big to fix locally after all. Citizens were given a New Deal in the 1930s and the routing of tax dollars accelerated. Despite this bureaucratic growth spurt, as recently as the 1950s many of the programs designed to help people were local with funding routed from the local people through a private charity or local government office. The Great Society and bureaucratic expansion in the 1960s and 1970s would change that as transformational bureaucracy began to take control of the route more tax and charitable dollars travelled. Central government ‘experts’ were slowly put in charge of more and more rules and regulations impacting everyday living beyond federal authority, today accounting for over 96% of new rules and laws governing people. Agencies were started or expanded to combat poverty and crime, centralize education, tackle environmental issues, control water ways, oversee food supplies, determine nutrition standards, and much more. Additional federal tax dollars are needed for operating these growing federal services so more is collected locally, routed through bureaucrats and representatives in D.C. and doled back to the states and local communities depending on the decisions of the experts in charge. To further fund the growing central government fees are added to provide additional revenue streams, helping people is expensive after all. One agency serves as a good example of the complexities this route for taxes and fees can lead to. The Department of Education is a warm and fuzzy agency that was not officially created until 1979, beginning operations in May of 1980 (just over 36 years ago). With over $75 billion tax dollars and thousands of bureaucrats deciding what education programs and places will receive some of those dollars, many already believe it is a vital agency we cannot educate our children without. States have become agents for the department in an effort to maintain funding sent from D.C. to the states while local schools adhere to department demands or risk losing precious financial aid granted to them by D.C. bureaucrats, secured for them by their elected representatives. Finances that originated with the people, were sent to D.C., filtered through the DOE, and a portion returned to the people’s local schools IF those schools adhere to the DOE rules and regulations. Is education better because of the last 36 years of routing dollars through the central government agency? Most citizens would say no, locally our schools are not better under central planning. Politicians will tell those same citizens it is unthinkable to eliminate this federal department, after all it would send us back to the era of one room school houses and we need to reach for the future, not get stuck in the past. Besides, we’re told, giving the tax dollars back to state and local control may lead to fraud, waste, and abuse while risking our children’s ability to learn. After all, nobody cares for your children more than the bureaucrats, politicians, and unions dedicated to expanding their programs for your sake. Opposing this agency brands you as someone uncaring for children or education. Oppose the EPA and you want to return to polluted water and air. Dept. of Health and Human Services opposition means you want to return to child labor and sweat shops. If you don’t like the Dept. of Energy you must want to live by candlelight. BLM opposition means you want to destroy public lands. Any thought of operating through a clearer route than the D.C. tax and fee route means you are delusional, archaic, some kind of originalist, and must just hate government. You’re likely an anarchist, rebel, or even perhaps a terrorist according to some bureaucrats, special interest groups, and politicians. Transformational bureaucracy is pitched to be an excellent route for the people. State, local, and self-governing routes of the past are outdated and far less traveled. It is better, we are sold, to stick to the toll road of federal control to arrive safely at your destination, living a democratic equal life. Forget any other routes, ignore big government failures, and simply send more dollars to make travel better. Better economics, less poverty, better crime rates, less drugs, better streets, less danger, better send in the money, less need to care for self, better believe in transformation through rules and regulation, trust the road most traveled, stay with centralized planning, fund the federal bureaucracy. There’s a legacy to build for our country, our children, and our future so forget the self-governing localized past, toll gate up ahead. Government problems result from a simple routing error. We send our tax dollars to the federal government for daily life needs, give up local authority, beg them to send some back, and wonder why there is so much waste, so little success, and so much frustration. We then spend billions to elect people to play the beggars’ game for us, spend billions more to lobby those we just elected, spend billions more to repeat this cycle year after year while the central bureaucracy expands and poverty, crime, education, and the welfare state suffer locally. We route the dollars through transformational bureaucracy and end up racing down the highway to hell. Is this really the best route? “The escalation of ‘entitlements’ in the 1960s and 1970s has led to the devastation of American cities, the decline of American education, and the deterioration of self-reliance….The larger government gets, the more power it has to forbid any change in the systems-and the more its waste of our resources reduces the chance of getting out of this without national bankruptcy.” Harry Browne, Why Government Doesn’t Work

31 OCT 2016 · Turn on any talking heads show and the buzz once again is centered on the Clinton email controversy. For those that choose to vote incompetently, not taking the time to study each issue and candidate before casting an emotional or single issue vote, hearing about emails brings yawns. After all, many have accidentally hit reply all or sent a personal email through their work so the Clinton ‘email’ scandal is just that broad right-wing conspiracy she talked about for decades. Many are tired of hearing about her emails and are ready to cast their ballot, to be a part of electing the first woman to the presidency, no facts will interfere with their passion. For those casting a competent vote there’s no such mischaracterization, it is not about her email account or some work-related emails sent through a personal email account. Many fully understand this and still plan on voting for HRC while others simply cannot, in good conscience, vote for someone that has lied so much to so many for so long. A competent voter looks at everything and some see corruption and national security as less important than an expansion on the transformation that’s been accelerating the past quarter of a century, nearing completion of a change from federalism to feudalism. Others cannot stomach someone so careless with national security secrets ever becoming Commander-in-Chief. Each will at least cast a vote understanding Hillary Clinton is more careful with her personal privacy than the privacy of her country. Just as the Lewinsky ordeal was never about just having sex with a young intern, spinning the tale as if it were was all that was necessary to help Bill Clinton not just survive but thrive during his post presidential years. Make something sound mundane enough, talk about that terrible right-wing conspiracy thing, mix in some misdirection with international warmongering and economic chaos and you’ve got a formula for getting away with just about anything. The Clinton family and their close knit circle are experts at leading the incompetent to the polls, they have decades of practice. Just look at the Democratic Party success among minority voting groups in rundown inner cities or broken small towns and it is clear how good they are. There are the millions who are competent regarding such matters but still bear allegiance to transformational bureaucracy over self-governing federalism. Transformational bureaucracy provides just enough to survive, if you qualify, while never allowing an opportunity to thrive and rise outside of those tied to the political machine in control. Despite proof this is a political practice each cycle, promise big…deliver little, progress marches on. Keeping people dependent, divided and distracted are key to holding power over the making of rules and regulations while continuing to expand that power year after year. It’s taken over 100 years but total transformation is finally within the grasp of our modern progressive thinkers. Just because a progressive leader is careless enough to risk national security, mishandle the secrets of our country, put lives in danger, and consistently lie to the public about it is no reason not to support her for progressives who see how close they are to total transformation. Hillary Clinton is the one candidate left standing guaranteed to help collapse federalism and its check and balance rule of law nonsense. She can help complete the transformation and finally end the façade of being a constitutional country and progress toward a socially engineered administrative state, joining a world of administrative states. Corruption, scandal, lies, and deceit are just a right-wing conspiracy, likely started by those Russians after all, so let’s talk free college, shall we? Should she lose it could slow down or, worse yet, reverse some of the transformation already in place. That’s too high a price to pay, bureaucracy and cronyism would suffer and the people may taste the liberating effect of responsible self-government. Risk the country and the people but never risk the faction, never retreat from progressive gains no matter the destructive results. Established power is easier to maintain than recapture if lost. Liberty must not be unleashed again, it hinders the elites’ ability to control the voting masses. Competent voters know it is not about Clinton emails but many of the competent are leading the incompetent to the polls. Will federalism survive? “Americans are so enamored of equality they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.” Alexis de Tocqueville

26 OCT 2016 · According to Dictionary.com one definition of insane is “utterly senseless: an insane plan.” Insanity’s fourth definition is: “A. extreme foolishness; folly; senselessness; foolhardiness: Trying to drive through that traffic would be pure insanity. B. a foolish or senseless action, policy, statement, etc.: We've heard decades of insanities in our political discourse.” Bureaucratic rule is exponentially expanding at all levels of government with the federal bureaucracy leading the way, driving state and local bureaus to keep pace. Bureaucratic rules accounted for 96.8% of all laws and rules created and enacted in 2015. Elected officials, the people voted for good or bad, only accounted for 3.2%. The trend has been evolving faster with each passing years since the 1930s but nothing has been as accelerated as the last 20 years. The Progressive Era belief that expertly managed administrative law is the answer to ending factional corruption is failing while quite the opposite is prevailing, factional corruption is expertly managing administrative law. High school students learn about Iron Triangles and Issue Networks studying American Government. AP study guides boil down how true rules and regulations, with the force of law, are created beyond representatives or the people. Turning on the TV we may see ads and programs promoting various causes or news reports of specific aspects of daily life the government is talking about regulating. This is a natural part of the Issue Networks process as the mass media is one of five key players within the network that sets rules for the rest to follow. As taught to our high school students, creating rules and regulations consist of; 1.Mass Media and Public Relations Firms 2.Special Interest Groups and Political Action Committees 3.Policy Experts, Think Tanks, Lobbyists, and Associations 4.Congressional Staff & Committees, especially sub-committees 5.Bureaucratic Agencies In the Iron Triangle rules are crafted by three of the five; Special Interest Groups, Congressional Staff & Committees, and a Bureaucratic Agency. Bureaucracy is at the center and provides consistency from election cycle to election cycle. The people may vote for different congressional players (though 90% of incumbents are typically reelected in modern politics) but bureaucracies tend to stay intact through the political changes. These agencies, and their supposed experts in their field, are the heart of what Woodrow Wilson saw as improving government. Moving away from factions and constitutional law into administrative law was the very goal of the Founders of our Progressive Era. This approach would “open for the public a bureau of skilled, economical administration,” according to Wilson. Progress can be made when the impact of voting is reduced and the skill of well-paid experts efficiently crafts, administers, and adjudicates the laws progressives were sure. Bureaucracy was a means to control factional chaos and cronyism rampant at the turn of the 19th to 20th century. Just as American Federalism held a vision of relief from factional influence in the everyday lives of citizens, progressivism also wanted to solve for divisional party control. Over the past century regulatory governing has grown beyond Supreme Law as the number of bureaus creating rules has grown. For over 70 years congress has delegated rule-making to alphabet agencies who have structured their bureaus to resist political change. Once an agency or bureau is created it becomes impossible to close as bureaucrats build toward protecting their agency above all else, including common sense. The people are led to vote for representatives who will seldom have the ability to truly deliver beyond special interest pork. They can learn to skillfully play the seniority driven, lobby infused career games required to gain power. Party leaders will craft their campaigns for reelection and decide which positions a representative can compete for internally, also beyond the vote of the people. The internal campaign for the coveted majority or minority leader roles are an example of the sub-government at work inside the legislative branches. The result is a decades’ long shift in law making from congress, busy with committee work and constant campaigns, to administrative rule makers more than willing to grow their bureaus. Administrative Law is proving negatively impactful more often than positively helpful for most citizens. The sheer volume of regulations is numbing to the average citizen attempting to simply live life. Bureaucracy is not solely a federal government progression, every level of state and local government has embraced administrative law although federal bureaus are growing in their ability to control state and local bureaus. Through all this growth in bureaucratic rules factions have gained firm control. Iron Triangles and Issue Networks rely on congressional committees. Factions took control of legislative branches before the progressive transformation took hold in earnest. Majority and minority roles were created inside each branch, first federally and then in all state houses. This effectively eliminated bicameralism as it became nothing but a façade following the 17th Amendment. Committee appointments and senior roles sparked increased cronyism and prime targets for lobbyists. The political equivalent of cock roaches; nothing seems capable of killing off factional influence which always leads to tyranny for the people. Since 1976 legislators, those we elect to oversee the laws we live by, only accounted for 5% of the laws, 95% were created as rules and regulations by bureaucrats over the past 20 years (4032 laws compared to 84310 rules). The percentage of laws by lawmakers has actually been decreasing during the country’s transformational years with 2015 showing only 3.2% of laws and rules coming from legislators instead of bureaucrats (114 laws compared to 3410 rules). 2016 is on pace to once again record a lower percentage for laws over rules. Some point to the fact more rules were created in 1976 than in 2015 (7,401 to 3,410). This is true yet misses the fact rules written today are much larger and more complex than rules written in past decades. Just as laws have reached ridiculous numbers of pages few read before voting, rules and regulations have also ballooned in the number of pages needed to attempt to explain them. Pages for explaining the rules is nearly double in 2015 compared to 1976 (24,861 to 12,589). According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s 2016 report, Ten Thousand Commandments, the cost for compliance is $1.885 trillion dollars, a hidden tax that now is greater than the total collected through income taxes, which is $1.82 trillion dollars. Sadly, the hidden tax is often unseen but felt through price increases, service decreases, and overall suppression in the buying power of those striving to earn a living or embrace retirement. Hidden taxes often impact citizens making a lower income while also leading to more slipping from middle income to lower income in a year over year comparison. We are on the brink of 100% bureaucratic rule, this is not fantasy, conspiracy, or hype. Many seeking our votes declare their readiness to continue the march toward total progressive transformation, after all, we’re told, we cannot give up the gains we have made in helping the poor and disadvantaged among us. There’s no longer any doubt corruption is rampant in all branches of government and the bureaucracy truly is the center of power which structurally provides the executive more authority than Supreme Law grants. Power also gives insight into why many politicians reaching their 70s and 80s don’t want to retire but instead campaign for just one more term as their seniority is hard to give up. People must decide if this transformation toward central control is insane or the best way for our country to govern. If it is not the best way to govern it is time to reconsider American Federalism. Federalism is the one system granted under Supreme Law and the one which can be restored peacefully through much effort as bureaucrats and long-term politicians won’t give up control easily. With the lessons learned from our past we can structure restoration to embrace the good advancements we’ve made while defending against future assaults by factional bureaucracy. Liberty is simple yet far from easy. Freedom is confusing when explained by those seeking to take both freedom and liberty away. Are you ready to discuss restoring American Federalism or is the very notion of restoration insane? “The Progressive Era has been hailed by historians as the time America came of age. In truth, it was the time when America sacrificed liberty, privacy, stability, and neutrality to be more like Old World countries immigrants to American were fleeing.” Harry Browne, Why Government Doesn’t Work