Subject: EMF and Article 4 of U.S. Constitution (Lundquist)..
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 064523 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers"
To: emfguru
--------------------------------------------------
......Glad to see that there is more interest in this aspect.... I very
much believe that the politics of this issue is so important!! We will
not get the EMF matter resolved to the PUBLIC's good ... without dealing
decisively with the political side...... (Which also means $$$$$$$.)
It's not "the science" that is holding us up now...... It is the
**perversion** of the science ... which is under political ($$$$$$$$)
control!
Cheerio.....
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
roy@emfguru.com
.....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
NEW!!! Website... http://emfguru.com
...................People are more important than profits.................
Missed opportunity...
$$$$$ We could have changed the corrupted system!! $$$$$
McCain !!
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 20 Apr 00 11:58:01 MDT
From: MARJORIE LUNDQUIST
To: rbeavers@llion.org
Subject: Article 4 of U.S. Constitution
The idea of using Article 4 of the U.S. Constitution as a basis for
environmental protection is intriguing. However, I believe it will work
far better for chemicals than for electromagnetic fields and radiation.
Part of the problem is that this approach relies on asking (or demanding)
that a government body do something that (1) it doesn't want to do; or (2)
it doesn't know how to do; or (3) it doesn't believe needs to be done.
Also, I see no way to enforce this constitutional demand, without going to
court! So this is not a way to avoid the courts.
It could work if those making the demand are extremely specific, and
spell out EXACTLY what it is they want the federal government to do, and
how they want it done. Then the federal government would not be asked for
its help (which leaves it to the government to decide what is to be done,
and how); it would be given instructions (which means that those making
the demand would be telling the government body what to do and how to do
it).
Then the question is, what government body would this demand be delivered
to?
Congress passed the Telecommunciations Act of 1996, but we can always
vote the scoundrels out of office, so this approach may not work well if
directed to Congress.
It could be addressed to the EPA, or to the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health within the FDA (both agencies of the Executive branch
of the U.S. federal government), but these agencies are accustomed to
answering to the U.S. Congress. So they might feel free to ignore such
demands.
A generalized demand like "research the health effects of microwave
radiation" is meaningless, because there are so many ways to do the
research badly, obtaining results that are useless. Besides, there is
already an enormous amount of knowledge about the biological and health
effects of microwave radiation in the published medical and scientific
literature. [.......!!!!!!!!!!......guru........]
For a decade I have been seeking financial support to review the existing
literature and "pull it together" but nobody wants to pay for this to be
done.
What might work best is to wait until Britain's Independent Expert Group
on Mobile Phones puts out its final report, and use THAT as a basis for
demanding (from the U.S. Congress) a nationwide moratorium on the further
spread of wireless telecommunications base stations, maybe on the grounds
that this is a non-lethal weapons technology being used against the people
of the United States by wireless telecommunications firms, and the
Congress has a duty (under Article 4) to protect the people from it --
instead of giving the wireless telecommunications industry blanket
authorization to assault U.S. citizens with it, as the Telecommunciations
Act of 1996 has allowed the industry to do. [.......!!!!!!!.....guru...]
The agencies of the Executive Branch of the U.S. government are subject
to Congressional oversight, so as long as Congress wants a domestic
wireless telecommunications industry, the Executive Branch agencies are
likely to give Congress what it wants.
Now if a great many state legislatures made a demand to Congress, and
also indicated that noncompliance on the part of Congress could result if
one or more states seceding from the USA, THEN you would see Congress
paying close attention!
Or maybe we should just write a NEW Declaration of
Independence.--Marjorie
____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com