Frederic Bastiat and Us. Please click here and scroll to the bottom of the site to add a comment.

It’s raining dollars!  What would Frederic Bastiat have to say about this if he could speak to us from 1848?

As government regulations grow slowly, we become used to the harness – Judge Robert Bork

Frederic Bastiat

We interrupt our regular programming for a NEWS FLASH!  The President bans windows in order to benefit candle makers; candle production, he says, will stimulate the economy as long as candles aren’t melted by sunlight.  The administration also announces it will nationalize candle manufacturing, allow greedy wax suppliers only 10% of the money they are owed by the candle makers, plus grant a 30% share of Acme Candles, Inc. (thank you Road Runner and Coyote) to the UCMDWU (United Candle Mold Delivery Workers’ Union).  NYT White House correspondent rushes out and wires in an editorial describing shivers up his leg after press secretary Robert Gibbs makes the announcement.

I wish I could take credit for this prescient concept.  I’ll admit to only my personal sarcasm in tying the philosophy of that remarkably witty proponent of freedom and liberty: Frederic Bastiat, (see link to Wikipedia entry from the right sidebar) to our current state of affairs.  Frederic Bastiat was a member of what was known as the French Liberal School in the 1840s (liberal as in the classical/original free market definition), warning of the folly of government intervention in the marketplace.  His parable of a fictitious petition by candle makers to the French government to eliminate windows in order to prevent candles from melting – thereby increasing economic prosperity by insuring the success of the industry (at the unintended expense of the window makers!?) – is a hilarious anecdote.  It also unfortunately illustrates the genesis of the president’s belief system.

Obviously above, I make reference to the bailout of GM, the perversion of the rule of law in throwing Chrysler bond holders to the wolves, and the artificial propping up of the UAW rather than normal bankruptcy pecking order.  Bastiat’s fable of altruistic but ultimately damaging marketplace intervention, is echoed consistently by the current administration’s adherence to this paradigm of unlimited spending by fiat justified by its immediate/short term effects on various and sundry interest groups.  In fact, Friedrich Hayek (see my previous two posts) said in a review of Bastiat that, according to 1930s economist John Maynard Keynes, the assumption of a multiplier effect (simply meaning a belief that the government can stimulate the economy by spending, producing a return greater than the cost of the stimulus; thereby increasing employment) on general economic prosperity would precisely mimic the argument of the candle makers!  (Take that Paul Krugman!  One for the Gipper.)

Cash for clunkers (and maybe the upcoming Stimulus II cash for “cluckers” chicken farm bailout?) would most certainly fit neatly into these fallacies: money will do more good in the hands of the government, and it is the duty of government (to be specific The Office of the Assistant to Czar for the 3rd Deputy of the Secretary for Chicken and Muffler Repair subsidies) to see that all get what they “deserve”.

Lastly, Frederic Bastiat’s landmark book: The Law has remarkable parallels to the economically naive entitlement philosophies of the current congressional majority.  For example Bastiat says in the section The Results of Legal Plunder, “No society can exist unless the laws are respectable to a certain degree.  The safest ways to make laws respected is to make them respectable.”  This quote illustrates the current congress’s path towards a society in which greater than 50% of workers pay no taxes, and receive payments in the form of the Earned Income Tax Credit.  Therefore, this non-tax paying majority – the receivers of public services and governmental largess – are able to award themselves through the ballot ever increasing free goods and services from the minority: the tax payers/suppliers of public services and governmental largess.  I see no end to this increase in receivers, to include the resulting unconstructive inertia towards manufactured dependence.

So to bring my polemic to a close (insert smiley face), I quote Bastiat one more time: “Legal plunder is identified as “… the law takes from some persons [what] belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong…The person who profits from this law… will claim that the state is obligated to protect and encourage his particular industry…”

— Or nationality, ethnicity, income demographic, religion, color, blue collar, white collar, government employee, Woodstock museum, first time home buyer, union member, sexual preference, illegal immigrant, home in foreclosure, Wall St., Main St., small business, large business, “green” energy producer, municipality, farmer, auto parts supplier, environmentalist, “too big to fail” bank and insurance companies, student, teacher, cop, mechanic, the bicycle spoke hooker-upper’s guild, donut shop owners’ amalgamated, and last but not least… Acme Candles, Inc!

Comments on the blog pro or con most welcome!  Really.

Recommended links:

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Fcollection=28&Itemid=27

http://homepage.newschool.edu/het//profiles/bastiat.htm

Sam Donaldson: 'Better Throw Bernanke and Fed Out Before They Do Further Damage'; 'Audit the Fed' Bill 'Gutted'

On ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopolous”, George Will of The Washington Post points to India’s recent run on the dollar as an indicator for a coming fall in the subjective greenback in favor of “other better stores of value”. Veteran White House correspondent for ABC, Sam Donaldson, says if that’s the case, “then, we’d better throw Ben Bernanke and the Fed out… Let’s get rid of them now before they do further damage.” (2:13):

Subcommittee Guts Ron Paul’s Bill to Audit the Fed

by Charles Scaliger

3 Nov 09 | The New American

The Federal Reserve Transparency Act (H.R. 1207), Congressman Ron Paul’s landmark bill to audit the Federal Reserve, has been gutted in a House subcommittee as it works its way toward a vote in the full House. The bill, which has garnered an astonishing 308 cosponsors from both parties, has attracted the scalpel of North Carolina Democrat Mel Watt (whose district happens to include Charlotte, the home of Bank of America, America’s largest commercial bank). According to Congressman Paul, whose Campaign for Liberty posted a video on the bill last weekend, Watt has cut out “just about everything” in prepping the bill for a full committee vote. (6:42):

The bill in its original form required audits of Fed transactions with foreign banks, of its deliberations on monetary policy, of the activities of the Open Market Committee, and disclosure of communications between the Federal Reserve Board and reserve banks. All of these provisions, according to Congressman Paul, have been removed. “There’s nothing left,” Paul told Bloomberg News in a telephone interview. “This is not a partisan issue. People all over the country want to know what the Fed is up to, and this legislation was supposed to help them do that.”

Congressman Paul intends to try to reinstate the bill’s original language and provisions in full committee deliberations, and is hopeful that many of the bill’s hundreds of co-sponsors will exert appropriate pressure on the committee to bring the bill in its pristinity to a full House vote sooner rather than later.

One of the bill’s most powerful sponsors, Congressman Barney Frank (chair of the House Financial Services Committee), intends that the bill in its final form require a lapse of time between Fed actions and their disclosure to auditors and Congressional overseers. Frank believes that a delay would “lessen market impact” while ensuring Fed accountability in the longer run. Congressman Paul, however, is opposed to any such dilution of the bill’s language, believing that any mandated delays in holding the Fed accountable would allow the central bank too much room to evade responsibility.

Congressman Paul is still optimistic that the bill will pass in some form, given the magnitude of support it has received. He noted that the Federal Reserve and the interests that defend its so-called “independence” (read: “secrecy”) are very entrenched and unlikely to yield without a fight.

The current struggle underway to subject the Federal Reserve to congressional scrutiny may turn out to be as historically significant as President Andrew Jackson’s titanic contest of wills with the arrogant, crafty head of the Second Bank of the United States, Nicholas Biddle. The latter, in trying to stave off the dissolution of his beloved seat of power, used the resources of the bank to create a recession and marshaled all his allies in Congress and business against Old Hickory, but ultimately lost the battle. Whether Congressman Paul and his allies can carry the day against Fed Chairman Bernanke and his host of establishment supporters remains to be seen.

*************

(h/t: SaveOurSovereignty3)

RELATED:

• When Only Abolition is Just, Reform is Naïve
• Gold Hits Record High as India Dumps Dollars
• Ron Paul on ‘The Riz Khan Show’ (Video)
• Dollar Hits All-Time Low Facing Rational ‘Demise’
• Congressman: Obama Bill Promoting Future ‘Secret Bailouts’ is ‘TARP on Steroids’
• Administration Aides Paid Millions By Wall Street

PROTESTS SOCIALIST HEALTH CARE BILL TO BE IMPOSED CONTRARY TO PEOPLE’S WISHES

(Nov. 6, 2009) —  Yesterday, House Representative Michele Bachman presided over one of the most unusual gathering of citizens in the country, called on just days’ notice, held on the steps of the U.S. Capitol building.  The protest aimed at getting attention of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi; and communicating to her the profound, grassroots opposition to the Federal Government’s control and mandate of health care coverage.

Cynthia Dizikes of the Minnesota Post reported Bachman’s words, in part:

“You came for an emergency House call,” Bachmann, R-Minn., yelled to the sign-waiving crowd. “And are they going to listen? Oh yeah, oh yeah. They’re going to listen. It was Thomas Jefferson who said a revolution every now and then is a good thing. What do you think?”

The crowd met Bachmann’s question with a thunderous roar. Homemade signs that offered suggestions like “No Obama Care,” “You Can’t Fix Stupid” and “Waterboard Congress” were hoisted higher into the air.

And indicated other notables who attended:

Bachmann was joined on steps of the Capitol by many other GOP lawmakers, including Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio, Republican whip Eric Cantor of Virginia and Rep. Tom Price of Georgia.

Actors John Voight and John Ratzenberger, who played Cliff on the TV series “Cheers,” also accompanied the House members and rallied the gathered protesters.

Gateway Pundit, offered pictures and video of the rally, yesterday.

YouTube has 2 videos on speeches given during the rally, Mark Levin:

And John Voight:

If any reader knows of a video of Bachmann at the rally, please send the URL by posting a comment below.

Finally, it should be noted that Congress can pass the bill; but there is no legitimate President to sign it, without whose signature it cannot become law.  The Health Care Bill will be, thus, the litmus test of liberty; whether America succumbs quietly to usurpation and tyranny, or breaks free.

In response to the Rally, Pelosi announced merely a 72 hour delay on voting on the bill.

Andrea Shea King, just moments after returning to Florida from the Rally, submitted to The Post & Email this photo of the citizens gathering before it began:

THE MONEY ISSUE MAY BE THE ESTABLISHMENT'S ACHILLES' HEEL IN ITS WAR ON "ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM"

Part 4 of 7

by Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.

(Editor’s Note: While I disagree with the author’s interpretations about the US Constitution, the rest of his scholarship should be read by all.)

PART THREE of this Commentary explained why a domestic crisis would probably not provide an occasion for reform of America’s monetary and banking systems. Continuing that analysis…

2. For constitutional change to occur, irresistible pressure for reintroduction of silver and gold coin (or their electronic surrogates) as media of exchange in American markets would have to build up before the Establishment could do much to reduce it. This could arise from a foreign crisis the Establishment could not control. Such an event might force the Establishment to return to the practical operations of constitutional money and banking in order to retain any hope of remaining in power at all. Or a foreign crisis might encourage and enable other centers of political and economic power in the federal system–such as the States–to introduce gold and silver as media of exchange in their own economies, in order to protect themselves and their citizens.

3. The eruption of a foreign monetary and banking crisis in the not-too-distant future is possible–even probable–in the Islamic world. Ironically enough, too, precisely because of what the Establishment is doing there.

a. Dar al-Islam (as Muslims denote the territory in which Islam predominates) already sees itself as targeted, besieged, invaded, and increasingly occupied by the West. For generations, the Islamic world has been the victim of a cold war: aggression that tip-toes in on the little cat’s feet of economic exploitation, pseudo-intellectual ridicule and bullying, political assaults, and cultural subversion aimed at control of Muslims’ primary resource (oil), and transmogrification of Islamic society along both:

* socio-economic and cultural lines–the insinuation of modernism in all its pernicious forms, including population control, radical feminism, the sexual revolution, hedonistic consumerism, and rampant materialism; and, ultimately,
* political lines–the imposition of what cheerleaders for Western intervention call “democracy,” so as to turn Dar al-Islam into a thoroughly demoralized, degenerate, manipulated, and subservient satellite of the West.

b. Most importantly, the economic, political, social, and cultural attacks all coalesce in a religious conflict: the Western Establishment’s assault on so-called “Islamic fundamentalism.” Here, one must speak plainly: To the Establishment, the pejorative buzz-word “fundamentalism” means any religion that teaches belief in a personal God, in transcendent justice (that is, eternal rewards and punishments for man’s conduct in this world), in absolute morality, in natural law, and ultimately and especially in objective truth. For–in the fields of money and banking, no less than in others–the Establishment cannot deal with objective truth, and therefore must deny that it exists.

Absent objective truth, the Establishment does not have to explain and defend what it is doing, because objective explanations and defenses are not possible, and therefore cannot be demanded. And if objective explanations and defenses are not necessary, the Establishment can never be held accountable for what it does. This is why the Establishment embraces the Supreme Court’s idiotic dictum that “[a]t the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”[1] That is, “I have a right to my truth, which is not necessarily your truth”–or, there exists no real “truth” at all, only supple excuses for some people’s vicious appetites, and slick rationalizations for their aggression against others.

If both the Establishment and its opponents have an equal right to define their own economic conceptions of “sound” money and “honest” banking, and their own legal conceptions of “constitutional” money and banking–and if they can define ALL “existence, * * * meaning, [and] * * * the universe,” they certainly can define these lesser-included matters–then the issue reduces to the stark question of naked power: Whose “truth” is to prevail? In other words, to Humpty Dumpty’s observation to Alice in Wonderland, that who is to be master is the pith of the problem. On this score, even were the Supreme Court correct that “[a]t the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life”, nonetheless the Constitution foresees that individuals may be deprived of their liberty–and property and even lives, too–with “due process of law.”[2] So, inasmuch as the Establishment controls the apparatus that claims the prerogative to tell Americans what constitutes “due process of law” (in particular, the courts and the law schools), its “right to define * * * existence, * * * meaning, * * * the universe, and * * * the mystery of human life” becomes paramount. Not a very comforting thought for any individual whose “liberty” and “property,” let alone “human life,” may be subject to the Establishment’s self-interested “defin[itions].”[3] When secular humanism degenerates–as it inevitably must–into secular elitism, the hoi polloi had better fear for their lives.

c. Beyond this Kulturkampf, though, the Islamic world is also assaulted by hot war: the forces of occupation that march in wearing combat boots, their deployment rationalized by a bastard progeny of the Brezhnev Doctrine, that politicians and bureaucrats puporting to speak for “the United States” may invade Dar al-Islam any time, any place, to strike at “terrorists;” occupying the land, overturning governments, killing or maiming those who resist (and many others who do not, but simply wander into the line of fire), and setting up new “democratic” puppet regimes. Not surprisingly, the whole Muslim world is desperate to fight back. (After all, how would you feel if United Nations “blue helmets” marched into America on the same theory?) But how can Muslims possibly defend themselves against the greatest military power in world history?

4. One alternative for an Islamic counterattack stands out among the rest.

a. Plainly, it would be futile for Muslims (or apparently Americans themselves, for that matter) to expostulate on the illegality of the Establishment’s military adventurism. For example, that in none of these incursions to date has Congress actually “declare[d] War”, or has anyone actually proven that “the common defence” and “the general Welfare” of the United States (as opposed to neo-imperialistic expansion aimed at promoting the goals of various selfish special-interest groups) are at stake, as the Constitution requires. Or that, inasmuch as the sole constitutional authority of the United States in the premises is to “guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,”[4] not a “democracy”, the General Government can claim no power to impose “democracy” on foreign nations. Or that, because the freedom Americans enjoy consists of “the Blessings of Liberty” their Constitution secures in the Preamble, the General Government cannot bring “freedom” to anyone by violating the Constitution. Or that, because Congress’s only relevant power is “[t]o define and punish * * * Offenses against the Law of Nations”,[5] it cannot authorize, enable, or even tolerate the President and the Armed Forces to violate “the Law of Nations” by preemptively marching into other countries to effect “regime change” on the basis of falsified evidence of an impending attack. Or that, because the Constitution is superior to any treaty, none of the foregoing can be undertaken under color of some directive or purported authorization from the United Nations or other multi-national or supra-national entity. Bootless, indeed, would be such remonstrances. For an Establishment that refuses to obey its own Constitution will not shrink from defying “the Law of Nations” or even “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” to which the Declaration of Independence appealed and on which all governmental authority in America rests and to which it must conform.

b. Then, too, Muslims cannot resist these incursions in the short run by massing conventional armies, navies, and air forces. Their scientific, technological, and industrial bases are too limited for that. And they cannot win in the long run by employing the low-intensity, irregular warfare the Establishment self-righteously condemns as “terrorism”, either. For the Establishment will cite such “terrorism” as an excuse for perpetuating and intensifying its offensives against Dar al-Islam, at least as long as sufficient American blood and treasure remain to be expended in campaigns of “pacification.”

c. But the Islamic world could strike a sudden, debilitating, and potentially fatal blow at the Establishment’s Achilles’ Heel–its Ponzified monetary and banking systems–through adoption by some significant portion of the world’s over 1.1 billion Muslims of gold and silver coin as their common media of exchange: specifically, the Islamic gold dinar and silver dirham. This is not idle speculation, but an imminent fact. Already the Internet is burgeoning with information that anyone who searches for web sites dealing with “the gold dinar” can discover for himself. So, what appears here is by no means news to Muslim monetary and economic theorists and activists–only to most Americans. No Muslim firebrand needs these Commentaries to understand the potential for exploiting the Islamic gold dinar and silver dirham as levers to overturn the Western Establishment’s monetary and banking systems. They already know it, and are encouraging their fellow Muslims to act upon that knowledge. But every American needs to become aware of this situation, in order to take appropriate countermeasures against what almost surely is coming.

d. Perhaps most interesting is that Muslim proponents of reintroducing specie as media of exchange focus, not simply on gold (which is the almost exclusive preoccupation of the few Western advocates of sound money), but also on silver. In this, they display great insight. In the West, even the most ardent advocates of gold often deny that silver is any longer a monetary metal. These friends of sound money forget, however, that silver’s monetary character, no less than gold’s, is contingent on the economic and legal context in which they are used as media of exchange.

Recall that silver lost its place as a monetary metal co-equal with gold not as the result of silver’s economic inferiority, but as the consequence of an international political conspiracy to “demonetize” it.[6] Which conspiracy then turned the same tactics on gold, in favor of fiat central-bank paper currency.[7] And succeeded in both instances.

Today, the partisans of legal-tender fiat currency contend that gold, as well as silver, is no longer a monetary metal. This argument is not without empirical evidence, inasmuch as neither silver nor gold circulates as a medium of exchange to any significant degree in any country’s markets, let alone throughout the world, as both gold and silver once did. On the other side, though, one can ask whether contemporary fiat paper currency, being merely an evidence and instrumentality of perpetual debt, is properly “money” at all, even though it does circulate to the practical exclusion of gold and silver. These disputes prove that what markets use as media of exchange can be controlled by law, by economics driven by law, by public ignorance and apathy, by the criminal politics of conspiracies among officeholders and special-interest groups, and especially by all of these operating in tandem. So, the answer to the assertion that silver is not a monetary metal is that it has been made so, just as gold has, and that, when once again offered to knowledgeable people as a medium of exchange in a usable form and under favorable legal and economic circumstances, silver will be accepted as such, just as gold will be.

Footnotes:

1, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992), reaffirmed in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 574 (2003).
2, See Amendments V and XIV, Section 1.
3, See, e.g., Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), and Victor Sperandeo & Alvaro Almedia, Crashmaker: A Federal Affaire (2000), ch. 117.
4, Article IV, Section 4.
5, Article I, Section 8, Clause 10.
6, See, e.g., M.W. Walbert, The Coming Battle: A Complete History of the National Banking Money Power in the United States (1899).
7, See J. Livingston, Origins of the Federal Reserve System: Money, Class, and Corporate Capitalism, 1890-1913 (1986).

I spit it

I spit it
trip it
wrap it in words
to be heard.
my lyrical
revolution
singular
evolution
of voices
inside my head
begging for life,
instead dead
at accusation
peaceful confrontation
boards
blogs
and twitter
140 character
assassinations.

I spit it
kick it
paper thru rhyme
laid out in lines
horizons
of thought
spewed out
not taught
to teach not preach
my intentions
my rage against
this political
and theological
cage
they place me in.

I spit it
kiss it
make love
and try not to miss it.
feelings rising
boisterous and chaotic
like Poe on acid
and Walton choking
on plastic,
mixing my disease
with your political relief
or so you would have it.
Segregate
deviate
separate and distort

my retort?

I spit it
piss it
try to enlist it.
the blood in me
White, Irish, Italian
and Cherokee.
I bleed to see my oppressor
a fine imitated successor
squirm.
first black
then gender base
denying life, liberty
pursuit of…
but wait
it’s all still hate!

I spit it
hit it
slam my words
against walls
like a grenade
exploding
in succession,
I take out the pen
and orchestrate
against oppression.
radically
poetically
in common words
Like Thomas Paine,
Just try to be heard.

and it’s
not that I don’t understand
your position
your egotistical
maniacal transitions
from what you know
to who you blow.
I get your opposition
to me
whilst you drink
wine forcefully
with hostility
and define my reality

But this is not chosen freely.
I have to be
me

so,
I spit it
seize it
with opportunity
knocking
I breathe it,
trying not to
hyperventilate
on the tsunami
of anger
in an effort
to not regurgitate
the same message
of equality,
but it is
the only thing
I see,
different between
you and me,
In this land
of the
supposedly free.

So I spit it
trip it
wrap it up in words
to be heard
my lyrical
revolution
singular evolution of
voices inside my head
begging for life
and avoiding death.

Coming Soon: Ubiquitous cities and surveillance

Just a little teaser for a coming in-depth UNETS report on the worldwide panopticon being erected around us.  Stay tuned.  The trends are leading to Ubiquitous Surveillance in Ubiquitous cities and towns around the world…

From 2005:

“…New Songdo will most likely be a chance to study the large-scale use of RFID, smart cards and sensor-based devices even as Western societies lag in this next wave of computing

“There are really no comparable comprehensive frameworks for ubiquitous computing,” said Anthony Townsend, a research director at the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, Calif., and a former Fulbright scholar in Seoul…

…This is a profit-generating model, unlike other U-city projects,” Mr. Kim said. “Songdo U-Life will charge building owners for facilities management and act as a gateway to services. Our partners will test market services that require, say, wireless data access everywhere or a common ID system, without having to build anything themselves.”

More philosophically, “New Songdo sounds like it will be one big Petri dish for understanding how people want to use technology,” said B. J. Fogg, the director of the Persuasive Technology Lab at Stanford University.

If so, it is an experiment much easier to do in Asia than in the West.

“Much of this technology was developed in U.S. research labs, but there are fewer social and regulatory obstacles to implementing them in Korea,” said Mr. Townsend, who consulted on Seoul’s own U-city plan, known as Digital Media City. “There is an historical expectation of less privacy. Korea is willing to put off the hard questions to take the early lead and set standards.”

Related:

Official Songdo (a U-City) Website

Built right in: New Songdo City will use the "best" Big Brother Technology from around the world

The world’s first Ubiquitous Surveillance City- London, where Big Brother watches school-kids in the bathroom:

H1N1 Power.gov - Flu in the Age of Obama

http://www.flu.gov/professional/federal/h1n1emergency10242009.html 

On October 24, 2009, President Obama signed a proclamation declaring the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic a National Emergency to facilitate our ability to respond to the pandemic by enabling – if warranted – the waiver of certain statutory Federal requirements for medical treatment facilities. In particular, this proclamation is aimed at providing HHS the ability to waive legal requirements that could otherwise limit the ability of our nation’s health care system to respond to the surge of patients with the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus. Here is the official declaration . 

Does this mean anything? I can not answer that question. It does illicit curiosity, however. Due to the government’s power grab over the past several years, and exacerbated by the fact the “H1N1″ flu does not seem important enough at this point to illicit such a powerful response, I became interested in learning more.  

I have noted a brief summary of the National Emergency Powers Act, a report to Congress on Martial Law and National Emergency, and listed the Executive Orders that brought us to a place where, by the stroke of the President’s pen, our rights, our property, our freedom could be gone without due process or consideration of the Constitution.  

At one point in life I had trust in my government. Those days are long gone. Our government no longer deserves our trust. We must stay vigilant and look to the future from a base of knowledge. It is to that end I present the following information.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emergencies_Act 

The National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601-1651) is a United States federal law passed in 1976 to stop open-ended states of national emergency and formalize the power of Congress to provide certain checks and balances on the emergency powers of the President. The act sets a limit of two years on states of national emergency. It also imposes certain “procedural formalities” on the President when invoking such powers. 

The perceived need for the law arose from the scope and number of laws granting special powers to the executive in times of national emergency (or public danger). 

At least two constitutional rights are subject to revocation during a state of emergency: 

• The right of habeas corpus, under Article 1, Section 9;  
• The right to a grand jury for members of the National Guard when in actual service, under Fifth Amendment.  

In addition, many provisions of statutory law are contingent on a state of national emergency, as many as 500 by one count. 

It was due in part to concern that a declaration of “emergency” for one purpose should not invoke every possible executive emergency power that Congress in 1976 passed the National Emergencies Act. Among other provisions, this act requires the President to declare formally a national emergency and to specify the statutory authorities to be used under such a declaration. 

There were 32 declared national emergencies between 1976 and 2001.  Most of these were for the purpose of restricting trade with certain foreign entities under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. 1701-1707). 

CRS Report for Congress: Martial Law and National Emergency 

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS21024.pdf

Crises in public order, both real and potential, often evoke comments concerning a resort to martial law. While some ambiguity exists regarding the conditions of a martial law setting, such a prospect, nonetheless, is disturbing to many Americans who cherish their liberties, expect civilian law enforcement to prevail, and support civilian control of military authority. An overview of the concept of, exercise of, and authority underlying martial law is provided in this report, which will be updated as events warrant.  

Here are the executive orders I could identify by scouring the web. There may be more and if you know of any, please leave a comment with the information.

Kennedy:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows government to seize control of communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows government to take control of all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows government to take control over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows government to mobilize civilians for work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows government to take control over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows government to take control over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows government to take control over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

Johnson:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

Nixon:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11490 assigns emergency preparedness functions to federal departments and agencies, combining EOs 11001-11005 and 11051 into a single executive order.

Ford:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. 

Carter:

Executive Orders 12127 & 12148 creating FEMA :

(from wikipedia)

FEMA was established under the 1978 Reorganization Plan No. 3, and activated April 1, 1979 by Jimmy Carter in his Executive Order 12127. In July, Carter signed Executive Order 12148 shifting disaster relief efforts to the new federal level agency. FEMA absorbed the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General Services Administration and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities from HUD. FEMA was also given the responsibility for overseeing the nation’s Civil Defense, a function which had previously been performed by the Department of Defense’s Defense Civil Preparedness Agency.

Reagan:

Executive Order 12656 gives National Security Council authority to determine use of requisite emergency powers

Bush:

Executive Order 13010 gives FEMA control over all government agencies in cases of national emergency.

 

Recently I came across an article which tied all this together:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15099

Remember President Obama’s Executive Order basing 80,000 active troops at home for the first time in the history of the peacetime military establishment to “help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack….”
 
Now connect that information to the recent announcement that the military has established regional deployment locations all across the United States to “assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall, according to Defense Department officials.”
 
Civil unrest and crowd control?  Significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall?  What do they know that we don’t?
 
Swine flu has been made into a crisis in the minds of the public, even though swine flu, or H1N1, is the most non-lethal “killer” virus ever uncovered.   As a cataclysmic event demanding military assistance, it ranks near zero.  It is doubtful whether swine flu could even be classified as an “epidemic,” much less a “pandemic.”
 
Regular influenza, the common flu, kills 36,000 people every year. The 1918 flu pandemic killed an estimated 50-100 million people worldwide over a period of two years, approximately one-third the population of Europe at that time.  Global swine flu deaths topped just 1,000 this year.
 
But President Obama is predicting death tolls of 90,000 and possible infection of up to half the US population.
 
While every life matters, in statistical terms swine flu is a comparatively minor problem, which makes the hype by those in government and the military all the more suspicious.Washington certainly seems to be looking for some rationale for enhanced domestic military involvement, whether credible or not.US military at home—in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.  With impeccable timing, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has gone before Congress asking for the unprecedented authority to base 400,000 soldiers in communities all across the United States.
 
A recent US Army War College Report even outlined the conditions under which martial law could be introduced, listing:

 

…unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters are all paths to disruptive domestic shock. [Emphasis added.]

 

The CDC is finalizing quarantine regulations formulated during the Bush years that provide for quarantining “a large group of persons” suspected of having swine flu or other illnesses listed in an executive order. This means that President Obama can quarantine anyone as long as they have an illness he determines to be dangerous.  These new regulations even permit “provisional” quarantine of persons not actually carrying any virus.   In one section, the regulations empower the president to quarantine anyone that does not agree to be vaccinated, an ominous condition since recent investigations have revealed that swine flu vaccines can cause serious medical complications. Thousands of doctors have voiced strong opposition to the proposed swine flu vaccine, due to its association with neurological disorders. No matter, a bill before the Massachusetts State Senate would permit authorities to enter homes and detain without warrant citizens who do not agree to be forcibly vaccinated.  Iowa just released a new Orwellian quarantine policy directive that states in the event of a swine flu outbreak, “your home and other less restrictive alternatives are not acceptable.”  These moves appear to be the result of federal incentives advancing mandatory vaccination.

 

The Army hasn’t missed a step, putting out ads for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists.”  And, though most of the wild claims about “FEMA camps” have been appropriately and properly discredited, the fact remains that the Homeland Security Department has signed a $385 million contract with Halliburton subsidiary KBR Construction to build such facilities on an “as-needed” basis.
 
If you’re not already feeling nervous, revisit President Obama’s spine-chilling campaign pledge:

 

 

We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

With the Serve America Act, this alarming proposition has become reality.  The broad authority given to this force is staggering.  Section 1505 gives the newly created National Civilian Community Corps the power to address national “needs” related to “natural and other disasters,” “infrastructure improvement,” “environmental stewardship and conservation,” “energy conservation,” and “urban and rural development.”  The legislation reiterates that the corps will “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service.”

 

Nowhere have these two spheres ever been combined that tyranny has not resulted. 

 

We need to all pay attention and know what Martial Law entails. We will keep an eye on events and declarations from the government and from what I call “State TV”.  We should not panic at this point over the flu or over the declaration of National Emergency. Keep your eyes and ears open and know going forward suspicion may be warranted.

Lastly, here is what I found through Dept of Health and Human Services:

http://www.hhs.gov/pandemicflu/plan/pdf/HHSPandemicInfluenzaPlan.pdf

 

HHS will be guided by the following principles in initiating and directing its response activities:

 

1) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS will work with federal, state, and local government partners and the private sector to coordinate pandemic influenza preparedness activities and to achieve interoperable response capabilities.

 

2) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS will encourage all Americans to be active partners in preparing their states, local communities, workplaces, and homes for pandemic influenza and will emphasize that a pandemic will require Americans to make difficult choices. An informed and responsive public is essential to minimizing the health effects of a pandemic and the resulting consequences to society.

 

3) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners, will work with the

pharmaceutical industry to develop domestic vaccine production capacity sufficient to provide vaccine for the entire U.S. population as soon as possible after the onset of a pandemic and, during the pre-pandemic period, to produce up to 20 million courses of vaccine against each circulating influenza virus with pandemic potential and to expand seasonal influenza domestic vaccine production to cover all Americans for whom vaccine is recommended through normal commercial transactions.

 

4) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners and in collaboration with the States, will procure sufficient quantities of antiviral drugs to treat 25% of the U.S. population and, in so doing, stimulate development of expanded domestic production capacity sufficient to accommodate subsequent needs through normal commercial transactions. HHS will stockpile antiviral medications in the Strategic National Stockpile, and states will create and maintain local stockpiles.

 

5) Sustained human-to-human transmission anywhere in the world will be the triggering event to initiate a pandemic response by the United States. Because we live in a global community, a human outbreak anywhere means risk everywhere.

 

6) The US will attempt to prevent an influenza pandemic or delay its emergence by striving to arrest isolated outbreaks of a novel influenza wherever circumstances suggest that such an attempt might be successful, acting in concert with WHO and other nations as appropriate. At the core of this strategy will be basic public health measures to reduce person-to-person transmission.

 

7) At the onset of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners, will work with the

pharmaceutical industry to procure vaccine directed against the pandemic strain and to distribute vaccine to state and local public health departments for pre-determined priority groups based on pre-approved state plans.

 

8 ) At the onset of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in collaboration with the states, will begin to distribute and deliver antiviral drugs from public stockpiles to healthcare facilities and others with direct patient care responsibility for administration to pre-determined priority groups.

 

HHS will follow the WHO published guidance for national pandemic planning, which defines pandemic

activities in six phases. WHO Phases 1 and 2 are the Interpandemic Period, which includes phases where no

new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans.

 

The Pandemic Alert Period includes a phase when human infection with a novel influenza strain has been identified but no evidence has been found of transmission between people or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact (WHO Phase 3) and includes phases where person-to-person transmission is occurring in clusters with limited human-to-human transmission (WHO Phases 4 and 5). WHO Phase 6 is the Pandemic

Period, in which there is increased and sustained transmission in the general population. (Appendix C describes the WHO pandemic phases in detail.)

 

Each pandemic phase is associated with a range of preparedness and response activities directed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, after consultation with international authorities and others, as necessary. Given that an influenza pandemic may not unfold in a completely predictable way, decision-makers must regularly reassess their strategies and actions and make adjustments as necessary. This section highlights

critical pandemic preparedness and response activities to be implemented by HHS.

 

Table C-1: Summary of WHO Global Pandemic Phases (WHO Global Influenza

Preparedness Plan, 2005) – As of April, we are at Phase 5

Interpandemic Period

Phase 1. No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. An influenza virus subtype that has caused human infection may be present in animals. If present in animals, the risk of human infection or disease is considered to be low

 

Phase 2. No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. However, a circulating animal influenza virus subtype poses a substantial risk of human disease

 

Pandemic Alert Period

 

Phase 3. Human infection(s) with a new subtype but no human-to-human spread or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact

 

Phase 4. Small cluster(s) with limited human-to-human transmission but spread is highly localized, suggesting that the virus is not well adapted to humans

 

Phase 5. Larger cluster(s) but human-to-human spread is still localized, suggesting that the virus is becoming increasingly better adapted to humans but may not yet be fully transmissible (substantial pandemic risk)

Pandemic Period

 

Phase 6. Pandemic phase: increased and sustained transmission in the general population

 

An influenza pandemic may require activation of the National Response Plan (NRP), especially if the first

appearance of the disease in the United States occurs in one or a few isolated communities and an intense multi-party containment effort led by the federal government seems feasible. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in collaboration with HHS and other response partners, developed the NRP and the associated

National Incident Management System (NIMS) pursuant to the requirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) #5 – Management of Domestic Incidents. Full descriptions of the NRP and the NIMS, respectively, are available at  www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NRP_FullText.pdf  and

www.fema.gov/nims/nims_compliance.shtm#nimsdocument.

 

The intent of the NRP is to reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies;

to minimize the damage resulting from these emergencies; and to facilitate recovery. The NIMS aligns the special-purpose incident management and emergency response plans of federal government agencies into a unitary structure. Together, the NRP and the NIMS provide a conceptual and operational framework to

integrate the capabilities and resources of various governmental jurisdictions, incident management and emergency response disciplines, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector into a cohesive, coordinated, and seamless national framework for domestic incident management. The federal government can invoke the NRP partially or fully in the context of a threat, anticipation of a significant event, or the response to a significant event.

 

Other sources you may want to consult:

Selected Executive Orders on National Security

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/index.html

Federal Registry Database on Executive Orders

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/

FEMA

http://www.fema.gov/