Michael Peroutka Announces Presidential Campaign (December 15)

Radio Liberty and Others ^ | 1/1/2004 | Adam Valle

[The_Eaglet]

On December 15, 2003, Michael Peroutka announced his candidacy for the Constitution Party presidential nomination.

In an interview on Radio Liberty hosted by Dr. Stan Monteith, Mr. Peroutka identified the need to restore loyalty to the Constitution as a key reason for his campaign for the presidency,
"We really do need, Dr. Stan, an American, somebody who understands law and American form of government, to run for president; and I really believe that at this point, there is not such a person in any of the major parties ... because none of them give the slightest fig, I believe, about being loyal, and being faithful, to the Constitution of the United States, and I believe that someone needs to do that."

In response to recent expansions in federal funding of education and the Medicare program, Peroutka explained how federal involvement went beyond Constitutional limits,
"Article I Section 8 lays out those programs for which Congress may tax and spend money, and education just is not listed there. Education may in fact be a good thing, but the federal government has no business being there. If you have no authority to be there, if you can't do it constitutionally, you are not going to do it right. So, that's really a theme of our campaign here, Dr. Stan: they can't do it right, because they can't do it constitutionally."

Peroutka later explained, "The Constitution is a big stop sign that says, `Federal government, here is where you stop.' That's the way that began, and that's what we, frankly, need to return to."

Dr. Monteith and Mr. Peroutka also discussed the work of the Institute on the Constitution, a non-partisan organization that educates the electorate on the founding documents of the United States government, along with their historical and philosophical premises.

With the endorsement of Howard Phillips, the Constitution Party nominee in 2000, Peroutka expressed confidence in becoming the next standard-bearer for the Constitution Party, "I intend to be the candidate for the Constitution Party come next June when they have their convention."

When the host asked for closing thoughts, Mr. Peroutka offered these words, "America needs to return to an American understanding of law and government. That is to say, the purpose of government is to protect and secure God-given rights, and until we return to that understanding, we're going to be in trouble, and I believe that the Constitution Party and my hopeful candidacy will stand exactly for those principles."

In addition to his professional experience as an attorney and organizer of educational resource organizations, Peroutka served the Reagan administration in the Department of Health and Human Services. He now serves as chairman of the Constitution Party of Maryland and president of the Institute on the Constitution.

An audio file of this interview is available from Radio Liberty at http://66.36.228.157:8080/sw_archives/rliberty/rl12-15-03a.rm. This interview was broadcast live on the Internet and affiliate radio programs.

---

Other sources: Politcs1
American Independent Party of California News & Views
Constitution Party of Florida

[jgrubbs]

'God, Family, Republic' Web Page of Constitution Party Presidential Candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka Now Up and Running

1/19/04 7:00:00 AM

To: National Desk, Political Reporter

Contact: John Lofton, 410-760-7897 or 301-873-4612 (cell), for Michael Anthony Peroutka; http://www.Peroutka2004.com

PASADENA, Md., Jan. 19 /U.S. Newswire/ -- http://www.Peroutka2004.com is the Web address for Michael Anthony Peroutka who is seeking the Presidential nomination of the Constitution Party. His themes are "God-Family-Republic." He believes, as George Washington did, that it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge God by obeying Him. He believes that true marriage is God-created, between a man and woman only and requires the approval of no government. And he wants to restore our original representative Constitutional republic -- which was never a "democracy."

One of five children of Anthony and Elizabeth Peroutka, Michael has served as a law partner with his brother, Stephen, for the past eighteen years in the Pasadena, Maryland law firm of Peroutka and Peroutka, P.A.. During that time he has been active in pro- life issues and has assisted and founded many organizations including "The Institute on the Constitution" that seeks to educate Americans about their own history, heritage and form of government. It was his passion for learning about and restoring Constitutional government in his home state that led him to the Constitution Party and its dedication to principle over politics.

A graduate of Loyola College in Maryland and the University of Baltimore School of Law, Michael has been active in the Constitution Party for several years and currently serves as Chairman of the Constitution Party of Maryland and is on the Executive Committee of the National Party.

Early in his professional career Michael found himself unwittingly involved in a vast criminal enterprise - an experience which dramatically altered his life's work and helped to chart the path to his intended candidacy for public office. While employed at the United States Department of Health and Human Services as a young attorney, Michael realized that none of the programs on which he was working were authorized by the United States Constitution and were therefore unlawful.

Michael lives with his wife, Diane, and their children, Timothy, Patrick and Elizabeth in Millersville, Md. He is a Bible-believing Christian.

[The_Eaglet]

Thanks, jgrubbs.

It's official, folks. The web presence of Michael Peroutka's campaign is now up and running!

[The_Eaglet]

Actually, you should be looking at the person who most likely will govern by the Constitution.

This is worth repeating, along with your handle.

This is not Bush or the 9 gnomes. I will be looking at the third party candidates or writing in someone.

Call me a spoiler, but I am voting for the person that I see as the best person to lead our country out of the Repub/Dem socialist agenda that is on the table.

[The_Eaglet]

Gridlock is certainly preferable to the unconstitutional spending increases (such as Medicare)

Oh you mean the gridlock of having Clark, Dean, or Kerry as Commander in Chief.

It seems that they all would fall into the latter category along with Bush, so gridlock is preferable to their expected spending increases, too.

[GraniteStateConservative]

I thought I'd bump this two month old post. Worth repeating. Also, I find it interesting and I guess ironic that the government would revere a series of documents enough to host them on their servers, but completely ignore them. I just want someone to ask Kerry (or Bush, too) what their response would be to this passage after reading this to them. What would they say? I can't even guess. The whole thing is a farce.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to REMAIN IN THE STATE GOVERNMENTS NUMEROUS AND INDEFINITE. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States

Federalist 45

[GraniteStateConservative]

I'd add that reading this, you almost feel like it's some other country's founding document or that it's written in some foreign language. It has no relationship to us now. This passage may as well have been the ranting of some nut on a park bench in DC.