Text of Speech at Constitution Party State Convention, April 7, 2012

A few days ago, I was sitting in a radio station answering questions from callers. That is always an interesting experience. A caller asked me "What have you done in the last few years to save our country?" In a few minutes, I will tell you what I would say to him today. In the meantime, think about this question. 100 Years from now, what will historians say about our time? Will they say that a segment of the population stood up and educated the people and turned the tide of public opinion away from those who were willing to destroy the republic - or will they say that too many of us fiddled while Rome was burning and that as a result, we saw the end of the greatness and goodness of the United States?

In about 7 months, I think I may be able to give you a pretty good prediction, but what we do today and in the days to come may determine to an extent what that prediction will be. To start with, listen to this statement "The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are inspired documents and the source of the solutions to our nation's current problems!" If you believe that statement, please stand up.

Don't worry about who is or isn't standing. This is not for each of us to judge someone else. It is to evaluate ourselves.

AWAKE

If you are standing, you are at least on level 1 of a 5 point scale that may determine our future. All of you who are standing are awake. You realize that our country is in trouble. You know that our freedoms are being lost. You know that government is too intrusive in our lives, too expensive for us to sustain, too arrogant to respect our freedoms, our desires and our choices. It is a government that has forgotten that it is supposed to be "of the people, by the people and for the people." Sadly, many of our elected and appointed representatives have forgotten it as well. They seem to think that it should be government of the many by the few and for the few. That is a definition of tyranny. Hopefully, on the other side of things, it seems that, across this nation and here in Utah as well, people are starting to awaken, to get involved, to stop repeatedly voting for the same people and the same failed ideas that got us into this mess.

Levels 2 and 3 on this 5 point scale are qualified by the following. Have you read those founding documents. Do you understand them? Level 2 is for those who have read the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Level 3 is for those who have taken time to understand each of those documents and the unalienable and guaranteed rights that they promise to defend. We understand that these documents and the government they created do not provide these rights, but they promise to protect them and restrict the government and its employees from actions that would infringe on those rights. If level 2 or 3 describes you, please stay standing. The rest may sit down.  No matter what level you are on, I challenge you to move up at least one level in the next couple of weeks. You on these levels are AWARE.

AWARE

If you are aware, you know what has created the debt and the erosions of our freedoms. You know which laws and executive orders and judicial pronouncements have done this and how they did it. You know if those things that have been done were legal under the Constitution. You probably know how your representatives voted on critical issues of freedom. How did they vote on the Patriot Act? How did they vote on raising the debt limit? How did they vote on the National Defense Authorization Act? There are dozens more. I hope you know how they voted. Have they spoken out against the National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order? It's approximately EO# 13,600 - I'm not sure because they quit numbering them on the government website. These are edicts that carry the force of law and our current president is using them to circumvent congress - effectively legislating from the executive branch with no check and balance. That's not how it's supposed to work. Congress could challenge and stop them from taking effect. Senators can challenge them. Are they doing so? No they are not but I will! And yes, Mr. Obama, the Supreme Court can rule on the constitutionality of laws. In fact, it is their job.

Those who are aware understand that, if a government can give you the right to do something, they can also take it away. Do you understand that unalienable rights mean that those rights exist regardless of what government is in power and that our responsibility is to see that our government fulfills its proper role? Do you understand that the proper role of government is to protect and defend those rights?

ENGAGED

OK, you can sit down now, and thank you for helping me with that. The final levels, 4 and 5 are for those who are engaged in doing something. Are you actively engaged? You are here today. That tells me that you care enough to try to do something. I honor you for showing up - for showing up at your caucus meeting or your county convention, for taking the time, effort and money it took to be here today. For showing up at the polls in November. The question that I have to ask you is this. What are you going to do tomorrow? What are you going to do next week, or next month? Are you going to speak or will you hold your tongue so that people will not be offended or disagree with you? Will they stay uninformed because you weren't willing to speak? If you are speaking up, you are on level 4.

Many of us are peacemakers by nature. We like to calm the troubled waters. We like to make everybody feel good, even when they shouldn't. Our tendency is to compromise or agree with people to whatever extent we can because we hate conflict. I often feel that way. But let me tell you what I hate more than conflict. I hate that those we have entrusted with the defense of our liberties by and large do not even know or care that our freedoms are being quietly stolen away. I hate that a government that thinks it can tell us that we must purchase health insurance will soon think it can tell us what to eat or what to drive or where we can go or who we can worship or if we can defend ourselves. Oh wait! There are those in our government that already think that. Their numbers are growing and their bureaucracies are gaining more and more power. How can we combat all of this? Is just voting individually going to do it? What percentage of people in this country do you think are even awake to the problems? How many are aware? If that number is 10%, can they elect the people who will change things? How about 15 or 20%? No? Then how are we going to save our republic?

I have some suggestions for you no matter what level you are at today.

Get a copy of the US Constitution. Read it. Write it down in your own words. Then you will understand it. My children are in a class where they are asked to do that.

Get a copy of the Declaration of Independence. Do the same thing.

Get a copy of the Bill of Rights. Follow the same process. Then you will understand them.

All of those are available on my website along with an incredibly prophetic pamphlet published clear back in 1968 by Ezra Taft Benson entitled "The Proper Role of Government". There are also a number of other good resources.

Next, find out what the government is doing. Subscribe to a good newsletter or two that focus on that topic. Choose who you listen to or read carefully. Even some so-called conservatives still think that more government is the answer to most problems. It's even good to listen to those you disagree with occasionally so you can understand how they think.

Then, tell your representatives what matters to you by any means possible. If 60% of the people think that a law is bad but only 1% say anything, there is no incentive for our representatives to listen. If 60% of the people say something, I can guarantee you they will listen. They may not choose to follow, if they are arrogant or have their own agenda, but they will hear and they will bear responsibility if they do not act.

Next, take a class on the Constitution and why it is important. Hillsdale College has a free online course that you can take or share with your neighbors, family and friends. The Leadership Education Mentoring Institute (known as LEMI) is educating hundreds, if not thousands of young people in the principles of statesmanship and Constitutional government. My wife and I teach at one of their Commonwealth schools as volunteers. It has been a great experience and these are incredible young people, some of them are already doing amazing things in carrying forth the cause of freedom. They also have a  program for adults and everyone is welcome to attend. It is called the Freedom Project. It not only helps you to understand these principles, but how to share that understanding with others.

Read! If you have read what Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison and others that contributed to the creation of our nation wrote and said, you will understand how to write and say what needs to be heard today. If you read Scott Bradley's book "To Preserve the Nation", Ezra Taft Benson's pamphlet "The Proper Role of Government", Skousen's "5000 Year Leap" and even recent best-sellers like "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark Levin, it will give you the knowledge to converse or write intelligently on topics that people really need to know about. Once you have done that, find others who have also read them and discuss what you have learned.

That is level 4. To be on level 5, you need to find a way to teach people. It is the greatest need of our republic right now. Teach your children or get them in classes where they can learn. Share your ideas with your family, your friends and your neighbors. Yes, they may disagree with you or think you are crazy in some cases. They may even call you names. Most will respect you for standing for something. You may lose influence with others. But what good is that influence if you don't use it to make a difference?

Now, I want to thank all of you for standing up for our country. I want to spend just a moment on the current election. Mr. Hatch has made it a big issue to make sure everyone knows how much power and influence he will have if re-elected. Now, I don't know if he is a good guy or not. I don't know if he believes what he says or not. I do know, that on the important issues of personal liberty, reducing the size of the Federal Government and protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States, he does not have a very good voting record. I know he has done some good things and I thank him for that. He has also done a lot of things that are not so good and it seems to me to be getting worse. It seems to me that he still thinks that government is the solution instead of the problem. Why should we believe that giving him another 6 years will make him do anything different than what he has done for the last 36 years. Do we really want someone with his voting record to have that much power? I repeat, what good is power and influence if you don't use it to uphold the truth and defend liberty?

I am doing all I can to be a level 5 defender of freedom and the Constitution. It is why I am running even though I don't have money or fame or movie star looks or Super-PACs that will attack all my opponents. I am running to be a teacher, to teach principles of truth and the connection between following the US Constitution and freedom, goodness, greatness, prosperity and a brighter future for America. I am running to be a voice, a voice for what is true and right - a voice that won't compromise on the core values that create prosperity, liberty and moral character.

I am simply asking you - each of you - to move up at least one level, make a difference, find a way to affect the process. I would love it if everyone here could be on level 5 - the informed teacher. Don't look at the people around you - look at yourself. You are the one that controls what you do. If you don't have time, give money. If you don't have money, give some time. If you don't have either - find someone who does and convince them to help. I need your help - we all need your help. It matters. You matter. The future of our country matters. Find a way to do something that will make a difference.

Remember that radio caller? My answer to him is that I have learned, I have written or called my representatives, I have written editorials and responses to editorials, I have engaged in facebook debates. I have created websites. I have taught my children and volunteered at a school where I have taught other people's children, I have challenged or taught my family and friends. I even talk politics with my customers which probably costs me occasionally. And now, I am challenging a sitting Senator that has $15 million dollars to spend on defeating me and I'm crazy enough to think I might win if enough other people stand up and teach their neighbors, family and friends what we here already understand. I want all of us here to be noticed by those historians 100 years from now. I want them to say that we made a difference. A lot of candidates finish their speeches by saying something like "I am so-and-so and I'm asking for your support." Well,  I am Shaun McCausland, and your country needs your support. Thank you.

Constitutional Basis For and Restrictions on Social Conservatism

Let me start by saying that I consider myself a social conservative in most ways. I am strongly in favor of fidelity in marriage and traditional families and believe that they are the best way to raise children. I believe the traditional family is the foundation of a solid and productive society. I believe that choosing to live by a moral code that challenges and overcomes the natural or carnal impulses of mankind is one of the most important things that we do in this life. I also believe that, in some cases, social conservatives ask the government to punish or restrict people who don't agree with them about specific actions or even beliefs. When that approach infringes upon the freedoms and rights of others, it leaves the realm of being "righteous" and becomes judgemental and tyrannical.

As always, I must make decisions based on principles of truth and the foundation of the US Constitution. Here are the principles as I see them.

1. The role of the federal government is limited to those things the US Constitution requires of it. All other choices devolve to the states and to the citizens. (Amendment 10)

2. Freedom of religion is one of the bedrock rights of the republic. (Amendment 1)

3. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... (Amendment 4)

4. The moral character of a society has a direct correlation with its destiny. In a monarchy, the character of the king or queen has historically been of great influence on the character of the people. In a republic such as ours, the moral character of the representatives of the states and the people is very influential on the perceptions and actions of the people. The laws the representatives create, support and enforce encourage or discourage moral actions by the people.

5. Morally specific laws are often a response to and a reflection of a decreasing moral character in the general populace and encourage good people to do better, but bad people to disregard law in general.

6. Morally specific laws often exceed the limits of power allowed the federal government by the Constitution.

7. The principles of unalienable rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness should never be abridged by law unless actions taken under those rights infringe on the similar rights of others. All laws should reflect and defend those basic human rights.

8. The electorate should seek and promote men and women of high moral character for public office. When representatives are found to be derelict in their character, they should be removed from office by vote or, in cases of malfeasance or crime, by impeachment or recall.

9. Legislation should attempt to sustain and support moral character in the people, but not to force it except when the actions taken affect others adversely in their persons or property.

10. State and local laws and policies that discourage immorality and educate about its negative consequences, if carefully crafted to avoid persecuting minority beliefs, are permissable and often beneficial. Federal law does not include the mandate to support community standards, but only to "promote the general welfare".

11. Protection of children from physical and emotional harm that comes from exposure to negative experience and media is a proper role of the Federal Government.

How this affects social conservatism and those of us who subscribe to it is as follows.

The desire to ban abortions is consistent with the Declaration of Independence and Constitution since one of the unalienable rights is the right to life. When life begins can be debated, but the extreme position that life is not viable until after the birth is completed cannot be defended. There are those that propose that children can be "aborted" even up to hours after birth. Such position is anathema to the right to life. If there is question as to when life begins, we should err on the side of protecting life. Thus a complete ban on abortion with possible exceptions in the case of danger to the life of the mother is compatible with the Constitution.

Marriage is not correctly perceived as an institution of the federal government. Marriage is a social contract either sanctified by God or religious communities through religious ceremony or by agreement between people. The government has no right to either allow or disallow marriage between responsible adults under the law. The state and local governments do have the right to grant certain preferences and privileges to types of social contracts that it deems conducive to the "general welfare".  Federal tax law should not be used for social engineering.

I believe that pornography is damaging to both those who use it and those who create it. The courts have held that adults have the right to view it if they wish. I believe it appropriate that we make it much more difficult for children to view, especially inadvertently stumbling on it through deceptive websites, etc. I have long advocated that we mandate that pornographic sites use the .xxx extender (similar to .com or .net) and that browsers be fitted with easy to set up extender blocks to avoid unintentional exposure to those materials. Those who put pornographic material on any other type of site should be subject to fines and incarceration. This approach respects both the freedom of speech and expression and the rights we all should have not to have destructive images and other material thrust upon us. Child pornography is especially damaging to both viewers and victims. Prosecution of those viewing and producing these items should continue.

The advances in medical, biological and robotic sciences will continue to challenge us to determine what is morally acceptable in our society. My hope is that we will base our debates on these issues on sound and moral principles and not just on what is possible. We have already had major tragedies because we moved too fast with new technology without understanding all the unintended consequences we were creating. Thalidomide babies were just one of the more well-known of these type of consequences.

I stand strongly with those who uphold traditional families and traditional family values, but do not believe it morally right to try to force others to believe or even act as I try to unless their actions impinge on the rights and freedoms or well-being of others.

Principle Based Decision Making in Representative Government #2 - Health Care

The Federal Government has no constitutional jurisdiction in mandating, providing, subsidizing or restricting health care. States and communities (including faith-based and charitable groups) have the right if they wish to assist individuals and families with the cost and provision of health care and/or emergency services. Medicare should be phased out or transitioned into a state sponsored and funded system. The Federal Government does have (under the interstate commerce provisions) the responsibility to see that national or multi-state insurance companies do not engage in deceptive or discriminatory practices. They can also regulate the safety of chemicals (drugs) and medical devices sold on a national or multi-state basis.

As they determine what their level of involvement in health care should be, states and communities should keep the following principles in mind.

1. People have a variety of preferences as to what kind of health care they desire. Some are holistic, some prefer chiropractic, some use energy, light or aroma therapies, some use ceremonies or faith/priesthood healing. None of these are fully covered by insurance companies. Individuals have a right to choose what type of health care they get and should not have mandates that force them to pay, not only for their own care but for health care they do not agree with and won't use. Mandates are an abuse of governmental power, no matter what level of government tries to use them.

2. Availability of a medical procedure, device or chemical (drug) does not mean that everyone has a right to have it, even if they need it.

3. Health is a personal responsibility. To a great extent, individuals determine their health by their decisions on diet, exercise and types of activities.

4. Assistance to those who have injuries or disabilities not caused by their own actions are a special case. While it is not the responsibility of the federal government to address these, communities and states can and should marshall public resources to assist those in such need to the extent possible.

5. States and communities can provide with the consent and financial support of the members of those communities whatever level of support they determine to people who can not afford the care they need or want.

6. Foods and naturally grown (unrefined or unaltered) plants including medicinal or any other herbs should not be regulated or outlawed. These items, when sold outside their state of origin, can be monitored and any claims made as to their effects or effectiveness verified or disputed by the federal government under interstate commerce regulation. Any actions taken in case of fraud or false claims should be directed at the sellers of these items, not at removing them from availability.

7. Aging and death are natural processes of the human condition. Just because we can intervene and delay death or minimize the effects of aging does not automatically mean that the public should pay for doing so.

8. The reason that people are hoping the government (taxpayers) will pay for their health care is the incredible rise in the cost of that care over the last 70 years. The staggering increases in the cost of health care have been created by three things: a) extreme court and insurance settlements that create high insurance premiums for doctors, hospitals, drug companies and other health care entities, b) the high cost of educating and preparing doctors and specialists which in turn leads them to charge ever higher prices for their services, and c) unnecessary proceedures which are often required by insurance companies to avoid frivolous lawsuits rather than because they are actually needed by the patient. These issues will be addressed in another paper.

Response to Deseret News article on Romneycare

I agree with Mr. Romney that health care is a State and local issue, not the domain of the Federal government. I do not agree with ANY government (including Massachusetts) mandating that I purchase anything. If I am a person who chooses not to use traditional medicine, then I receive no benefit from mandated insurance even though I end up having to pay for it or pay a fine. People use the example of auto insurance. Good example. If I choose not to drive, I don't have to purchase it. States can (and have) made the decision to provide (or require that providers do so) certain types of care such as emergency services regardless of ability to pay. That is where this debate needs to go. How much and what types of care should be provided either by state taxation of its citizens or by paying clients of hospitals and health care providers or by purchasers of health insurance? One or more of those will pay for it - whether they like it or not. We need to decide as communities what is fair and responsible. The Federal government should not be involved.

Applying Principles to Problems #1 - Illegal Immigration

I am starting with admittedly the most divisive and difficult policy question we face. The solution is complex but easily understood when the principles relating to it are clear.

Here are the principles that I believe apply to this problem.

1. This is a problem that is the responsibility of the Federal Government. If they refuse to take that responsibility, it creates severe problems for the states and the citizens of our country.

2. Every country has the right to protect its borders and determine who to allow to visit, for how long and who should be allowed to stay and apply for citizenship

3. People have a right to seek to improve the health and well-being of their families - even if that means moving to a new area or country (unalienable rights to life and the pursuit of happiness)

4. People who demonstrate willingness to reform/repent should be forgiven and be given assistance and opportunity - they shouldn't, however, be given more than those who continue to live in integrity.

5. A Citizen should always have more rights, freedoms and opportunities than illegal aliens and other non-citizens.

6. Economic status and education should not be deciding factors for those applying to enter the country legally. Our country was built by those who had neither, but came here to build a better life through hard work and determination. (Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.)

The Solution

1. Arbitrary quotas on legal immigration must be removed or greatly expanded for a time as we provide an adjustment to the broken system we have been living under. We can no longer state that the country cannot assimilate the 12-20 million illegals living here, because we are doing it now. People wading through the system to immigrate legally are waiting as many as 15 years to complete the process. This makes it impossible for those who need to feed their families now to go through the process legally.

2. Deportation should cease for a period of one year while the changes below are instituted. This does not apply to those who break our laws, especially driving without a license or insurance, violence, theft and other serious crimes.

3. During that year, those who are here illegally can present themselves for expedited processing. No penalties will be invoked unless they are guilty of serious crimes. We will assist them to return to their country of origin and work with their government to bring them back legally as quickly as is possible, after criminal and background checks are completed.

4. Those in this program will not be placed in line ahead of those who have already applied to come here legally.

5. At the end of the deportation moratorium (1 year), those who have not taken advantage of the program will be considered criminals and treated as such. They will be deported. If they are found in our country again, they will be incarcerated and work at hard labor or domestic/institutional service/maintenance in government institutions such as prisons or to rebuild our roads, bridges and other public works until such time as they choose to return to their country of origin. This will provide them with the room and board they need to survive while acknowledging their status as illegal aliens with no rights except those that other criminals receive.

6. Those who take advantage of this program will be forgiven only for entering the country illegally. For them only, there will be a possible path to citizenship if they are not guilty of other crimes.

This is an example of how applying true principles to problems can help us to arrive at solutions that are creative, sensitive to peoples situations and have moral integrity. I welcome your comments and suggestions.

AmeriCANs Can! Don’t be an AmeriCAN’T

I just finished watching two of the most remarkable comebacks in sporting history. There have been bigger turnarounds, but never in the NCAA basketball tournament. With less than 5 minutes to play, Western Kentucky University trailed by 16 points. Over those last 4 minutes plus, they outscored their opponent 22-5 to win the game.

With a little more than 6 minutes left in the first half, Brigham Young University found themselves down by 25 points. Worse, they had been outplayed, out-hustled and out-defended at every turn. Iona College (their opponent) was on track to score nearly 150 points. Instead, in the remaining 26 minutes of the game, they only scored 23 points while BYU scored 54 to win. What happened? Did a star player for Iona fall to an injury? Did BYU bring a superstar off the bench to save the day? No. Coach Dave Rose saw that what they were doing wasn’t working and decided to make a change. Instead of trying to outrun the very talented Iona team, he decided to turn things around by focusing on defending and disrupting - a total change of direction. It worked. Not only did they stop the onslaught from the other team, they gained confidence and exhibited more teamwork. Coach Rose said "The look in our players' eyes at that time was, 'Game on. We've got a chance here,' “ What he didn’t mention was that he helped them to believe they could do it.

I know that basketball is not life and that metaphors always have limits, but I see truths in all kinds of things. In these contests I see a similarity to the situation we find our nation in today. Over the last 100 years, we have chosen to let our government grow far beyond its founder’s intent. We are letting our representatives in government "run up and down the court" spending our money and taking our freedoms without restraint. As a people, we have thought that, if we give government enough power and enough of our money, they could solve our problems, take care of the less-fortunate and make us safe. What we see today is that we have more problems, more of us fall into the less-fortunate category and we are definitely less safe than we were even 20 years ago. Asking the government to manage our lives has created immense debt. Our current course will make it even worse. We need to defend and disrupt. We need a total change of direction.

We are driving toward a cliff at high speed. The Democrats want to step on the gas and go faster. The Republicans (most of them) just want to go a little slower. I am asking, "Wait a minute. Shouldn't we turn the car around? You people are still driving us off the cliff."

Are we wise enough to determine, as coach Rose did, that what we are doing is not working? Are we courageous enough, as his players were, to believe that our best effort in a new direction can bring us to a better outcome, one that no one else might even believe is possible? I believe that we can save our nation from descending into mediocrity and weakness. I do know that, if we don’t change course soon and put forth out best effort to move our nation in a new direction, it will be too late. Let us all choose to believe we can make a difference. The motto “Yes we can!” is a great one - but only if it is coupled with the principles of truth, liberty and personal responsibility that echo “Yes we should!” Once we have a direction we can believe in, each of us must decide if we are willing to say “Yes I will!”

Be an AmeriCAN. Don’t be an AmeriCAN’T.

Announcing My Intention to Run for the US Senate as a Constitution Party Candidate from Utah

I have frankly tried to find a way to avoid running. It really takes too much time, money and emotion. Especially when I know there is an incredibly small chance of winning or even making a large difference. However, I believe that it is our responsibility to stand up for what we believe in and I am fairly certain that no one else is going to do that in this election. There are those opposing Mr. Hatch in the Republican Party, but their chances of unseating him are not as good as those who opposed Mr. Bennett two years ago. While Mr. Hatch speaks like a conservative, his voting record does not square with the Constitutional imperatives that I believe should be protected and defended.

I do not see myself as conservative or liberal, left-wing or right-wing. I simply attempt to be a principled, pragmatic Constitutionalist. That puts me at odds with some conservatives and many liberals. My thoughts on illegal immigration seem to offend extremists in both camps. It is similar with many other of my stands. I believe that, when we consider our unalienable rights, our duty to consider the rights of others to pursue happiness as well as their rights to life, liberty and property, we can usually find the right approach to legislate compassionately and minimally. We always need to try to serve the dual goals of justice and mercy. If we deny either, we either destroy the rule of law or ignore the growth and peace of our own souls and the souls of the citizenry.

I will post positions here over the next few weeks so people can see what I stand for. I reserve the right to alter or improve my statements if I can be shown the errors of my ways. I am not a politician and do not want to be. If I am wrong, I will find a better way. If I am unclear I will improve how I state what I believe. I want your input and your criticism. Even if I can't find a way to agree with you, your thoughts will challenge me to consider things and clarify what I think. Thank you for your input.

If you would like to help with my campaign or donate to the effort, please contact me at 435-668-7118.