By: Court Jones
July: 10/08

The perception of voting is a means to keep revolutions minimal, and therefore easily handled by government. The “American” form of voting is fraudulent in its very nature, and has allowed a small minority to plunder the wealth of the people. It has been this way before the United States came into existence. This year US citizens will be casting their ballots in hopes of electing the next US President who will represent them and all US citizens. The question I ask, “Does the President represent all US citizens?” Let us examine the numbers. According to the US Census Bureau there is an estimated 299,398,484 million US citizens and 75.4% are eligible voters under current voting restrictions, i.e. a voter must be a US citizen and over eighteen years of age. Out of the nearly 300 million US citizens, only 225,746,457 are eligible voters. Approximately half of all eligible voters cast their ballot, although estimates range as low as 40%. Assuming half vote for President, only 112,873,228 US citizens cast their ballot. Also assuming the winning candidate receives a majority share, i.e. 50% or more (President Clinton received only 47% of the popular vote for his first term), equates to only 56,436,614 voters can actually claim that their candidate represents them, or a mere 24% of the entire US population. I am using liberal numbers; real numbers may be lower. What about the other 76% of the population? Are they represented? How can the President represent the whole of the People when less than a quarter of the population voted for him? How can 24% force the majority to accept their candidate as the majorities’ representative? Legally, they cannot. These numbers indicate that a minority controls the fate of the majority! Perhaps examining the voting process will bring more light to these numbers.

From Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.

A person authorized by another to act for him, one entrusted with another’s business. One who represents and acts for another under the contract or relations of agency. One who deals not only with things, as does a servant, but with persons, using his own discretion as to means, and frequently establishing contractual relations between his principal and third persons.

From Ballantines Legal Dictionary 3rd ed.

One of the parties to an agency relationship, the one who acts for and represents the other party who is known as the principal, being a substitute or deputy appointed by the principal with power to do certain things which the principal may or can do. The word imports the correlative idea of a principal, and implies employment, service, delegated authority to do something in the name or stead of the principal.

From Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.

One who represents or stands in the place of another. A person chosen by the people to represent their several interests in a legislative body.

From Ballantines Legal Dictionary 3rd ed.

An agent, an officers or a corporation or association, a trustee, executor, or administrator of an estate, or any other person empowered to act for another. A member of the house of Representatives in Congress or a state legislature. A person who stands in the place of another.

From Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.

An agreement between two or more persons which creates an obligation to do or not to do a particular thing. Its essentials are competent parties, subject matter, a legal consideration, mutuality of agreement and mutuality of obligation.

From Ballantines Legal Dictionary 3rd ed.

Most agents need a written document stating what powers and limits you are granting to them. This is called an expressed contract. Is there a written document, a contract, between the voters and the elected representative, so called? The obvious answer is no. Nor has there ever been a written contract between the voters and the elected representative, so-called. You might quickly say, “What about the US Constitution or a State’s Constitution?” Did you sign that document? Did the elected representative, so-called, sign that same document? The obvious answer is no, neither party signed any document, so it does NOT legally bind the voter or elected representative to act in a certain manner. It is safe to conclude that there exists NO written document/contract obligating the elected representative to “represent” anyone for any purpose. Contracts can also be created by the physical actions between two parties without the aid of a written document, or an implied contract. Both parties, by their actions, agree that they are obligated to commit certain actions. An example might be a gas station vendor. The vendor advertises the price of gas per gallon. The vendor is obligated to sell gas at that price. You are obligated to pay for the number of gallons pumped at the advertised price. By physically pumping the gas, you have entered into a contract to purchase so many gallons at the advertised price. Another example could be a person who cannot drive to the grocery store and gives to a neighbor who can, money and a shopping list, to buy groceries for him/her. The neighbor accepts the money, goes to the store and purchases the items on the list, and returns home. No contract was written, but both parties were obligated to certain actions. The neighbor obligated him/herself to purchase the items on the list and return them to the purchaser. If the neighbor used those monies to purchase lottery tickets rather than food, then the neighbor breached his/her contractual duty and could be liable for any consequences. Conversely, if the person did not give enough funds to purchase the items on the list, and the neighbor made up the difference, the person would be contractually obligated to reimburse the neighbor. Implied contracts occur more frequently than we realize. Returning to topic, does an implied contract exist between voters and their elected representatives, so called?

For any contract to exist, both parties must be known to each other and freely, without coercion, both parties agree to enter into a contract, either expressed or implied. This DOES NOT occur in the voting process. The elected representative, so-called, has absolutely no idea who voted and who did not vote for him/her. All ballots are cast secretly, behind a curtain. You cannot prove whom you voted for at any election. as no receipt is given. Even proving you voted may be difficult. In Delaware, ID must be shown and the voter’s name is checked off, so, presumably, that person cannot vote again. A voter could show circumstantially he/she appeared at the voting polls, but nothing more. How can a contract exist when both parties are not known to each other? An elected representative, so-called has NO obligation toward any voter, as legally NO contract exists between voter and candidate.

Again you might say, “What about the oath my representative makes?” Ah, yes the oath. To whom is the oath made? Is it made to you? Prove it? Is it made to all within the voting district? Prove it? The oath has NO binding obligation to anyone, as it was made to no one, merely words to the winds, or window dressing if you prefer. Since the elected representative, so-called, has no factual nor legal knowledge of who voted him/her into office, he/she cannot swear an oath to anyone or anything. The best an elected representative, so-called, can say is a band of unknown people to me and unknown to themselves, secretly, cast a ballot in higher numbers than the other candidate, conferring upon me an elevated status as “representative,” but since I know not who this secret band of people are, I cannot be bound to do anything for any of them, nor can they expect me do anything for them, as they have not granted me any powers to represent them. The best a voter can say, is that I am a fan of “this” candidate or “that” candidate. And, I voted for “that” candidate, because. . .. Much like voting for your favorite singer on American Idol. You have preferences, and maybe your preference will win, but it is the producers of the show who decide what happens after the voting. The voter has little to no involvement after voting.

From the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 6, paragraph 1:

From Delaware’s State Constitution, Article 2, paragraph 13:

Only in session can their actions be questioned. All other times and places, they are NOT accountable. Clearly representatives, co-called, CANNOT “represent” the people, as an “agent” or “representative” can be sued for damages caused while acting on the principal’s behalf. The worst that can happen to a representative, so-called, is he/she can be censured and even expelled from the secret brotherhood. Beyond that, all criminal behavior is allowed. Theft is criminal whether legalized or not. Voting has been a fraud since the beginning. A shared delusion amongst the people that they have the power to change the course of the United States, their states, county councils or school districts. Voting has allowed a minority to engorge themselves at the peoples’ expense, and keep rebellions or revolutions to a minimum. For proof, look at democratic countries and see how many revolutions have occurred in their respective histories, and contrast that with the histories of dictatorships. Is this the system you were taught to believe in? The system that has shined like a beacon of hope for all oppressed peoples around the globe? If so, is it any wonder why the United States is deteriorating, why the “dollar” purchases less year after year, why newly elected candidates say they will change things but never do. Something to think about. I encourage everyone to NOT vote. Help get out the “NO VOTE” campaign. It is working; barely half of all eligible voters participate. Perhaps they know the truth, the fraud that is perpetuated in the United States. Perhaps they just do not care.