Description: Cutting edge, progressive social scientists a hundred years ago rejected the idea that all human beings possess the same, equal natural rights to their own person, property, and individual freedom. Instead, progressive academics borrowed from 19th Century European philosophy and held that different groups and races of people evolve at different rates, and therefore have different kinds of rights at different points in evolutionary time, depending on the political “capacity” they had demonstrated. This is the basis of what we call “identity politics” today, the view that different groups of people deserve different kinds of rights. It is the opposite of the idea that equal laws should offer equal protection for equal rights. That is why all free people should reject all laws that divide citizens into groups and offer certain perks and benefits to some at the expense of others. ~Thomas Krannawitter, Ph.D.
#109 is a proposed Statute (not amendment) to authorize bonding for transportation funds without raising taxes to “Fix our Damn Road’s”
Check back often! We will update as we learn more.
Joshua Sharf nails it again. Just say “No” to increasing the state sales tax to pay for what you’re already paying for: roads and bridges.
Kim Monson from Lone Tree shares Why We Don’t Need a Tax Hike to Fix Colorado’s Highways Read all about it in the Colorado Politics August 14th publication –
VOTE NO on Proposition #110- a HUGE sales tax increase is bad for Colorado!
Check back often! This page will be updated as we learn more.
Would you like to learn more about our founding documents?
Dr. Krannawitter is now President of Speakeasy Ideas, combining a deep knowledge of political and economic history, an insatiable appetite for learning, and an extraordinary gift for teaching the great ideas that have fueled human progress.
Watch this 48 minute educational video SIA 101.1: Declaration of Independence Pt I
This is part 1 of 9 in the Speak Easy lecture series on the Political Science of the American Founding.
PRINT this handout to go along with the video for part 1.
You can find the additional 8 videos in the series on the Speak Easy Ideas website
Watch this 1 hour and 16 minute lesson from the CATO Institute-
CATO University 2016: Why the Declaration of Independence Was Right
Check out this Interactive Voter Map from the New York Times!
You can view as large as the entire country, or by county, or as detailed as the total number of votes in the precinct for each Presidential Candidate in 2016.
Reach out to Tanne Blackburn, Douglas County GOP chairperson, to learn how you can help.
0″If men were angels, no government would be necessary. In framing a
government which is to be administered by men over men, the great
difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the
governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”
James Madison, Federalist Paper No. 51 (1788)
James Madison’s quote from the Federalist Papers gets at the heart of the
problem that even a government of law is ultimately “administered by men
over men.” The framers of the U.S. Constitution addressed this problem by
dividing power among the different branches of government (legislative,
executive, and judicial). This framework for government, known as the
separation of powers, ensures that no one person is able to gain absolute
power and stand above the law. Each branch of our government has some
level of control or oversight over the actions of the other branches.
The rule of law does not depend upon a U.S.-style separation of powers.
In a parliamentary system, for example, the powers of the executive and
legislative branches are combined; procedures such as “no confidence” votes
and regularly scheduled elections serve as a check on the party that controls
the parliament. The key point is that every form of government has to have
some system to ensure that no one in the government has so much power that
they can act above the law.
“[N]either laws nor the procedures used to create or
implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws
must not be arbitrary.”
—U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood,
“The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003)
The rule of law and the ABA World Justice Project~
In 2007, ABA President William Neukom established the World Justice Project. The World
Justice Project recognizes the problem that “the ‘rule of law’ is a frequently used term that
is rarely defined.”
The World Justice Project has proposed a working definition of the rule of law that
comprises four principles:
A system of self-government in which all persons, including the government, are
accountable under the law
A system based on fair, publicized, broadly understood and stable laws
A fair, robust, and accessible legal process in which rights and responsibilities
based in law are evenly enforced
Diverse, competent, and independent lawyers and judge
~From the ABA Division for Public Education