• Restoring the United States to “one nation under God”
• Return to Constitutional, limited government
• Protect the inalienable right to life of all, including the unborn, elderly and infirm
• Protect individual right to keep and bear arms
• Restore national sovereignty, including withdrawal from the United Nations
• Maintain a strong national defense
• Repeal the unconstitutional income tax
• Stop all unconstitutional spending
• Protect the inalienable rights of liberty and private property
• Abolish the Federal Reserve System and restore Constitutional money
• Promote pro-family policies
• End federal subsidies for and control of education and welfare
• Comprehensive immigration reform
• Return control of elections to the state and local authorities
• Abolish special interest entitlements (corporate welfare)

Back to Topics
 

The Constitution Party has the ideals, the platform and the message to become a significant force on the political landscape.  It lacks only grassroots development -- an army of workers at the local level.  The political maxim, "all politics is local," will have new meaning as the Constitution Party implements its program for growth.

The strategic plan of the Constitution Party has shifted focus to building and developing state parties and, more importantly, organizing activists at the local level.  Just as a building is only as strong as its foundation, a political movement can prevail only if it is organized effectively at the grassroots.  With a National Field Director ready to go wherever needed, the Constitution Party is committed to providing tools at the local and state level.  These tools include instructional manuals, candidate training seminars and "in the field" assistance.  Properly equipped candidates will convey the message and win races.

With local organizations functioning effectively, they will enable the Party to achieve its goal of electing people to state legislative seats, or higher, in 2002 and provide a base of support for statewide and presidential candidates.

Back to Topics
 

Why Is the CP Different From Others?

The bottom line is a party's philosophy of what the role of government should be.  The two major parties legislate as if government is God and can solve all problems.  This results in a more powerful, centralized government and a people who become more dependent on government and less dependent on themselves and God.  Libertarian and Reform Party leaders think man is sovereign and has all the answers, therefore, changes in cultural views and morals will result in changes in law and its interpretation.  History has shown that cultures which have no absolutes end in anarchy.

The Constitution Party is the only party that acknowledges the sovereignty of God and wants to return our country to the Constitution which is based on biblical principles.  Government's role is to secure the rights of the people rather than control and provide for people.

The Constitution Party affirms the original Constitutional framework of federalism (sovereign states) and separation of powers, calling for the repeal of all laws and abolition of all programs not expressly authorized by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  Other parties may call for a smaller government but are not committed to reducing government to its Constitutional boundaries.

The Constitution Party will hold candidates accountable who are elected to office on its platform.  Other parties allow candidates to act contrary to their platform and suffer no consequences.

The Constitution Party has not, nor will ever, take funds from the government, believing that action to be unconstitutional.  Others advocate campaign finance reform, yet they take money from taxpayers who may not agree with their platform.

The Constitution Party intends to repeal the federal income tax and cut enough spending to operate the government without it.  Others propose small tax reductions, a flat tax or a national sales tax.  However, a different kind of tax will not yield a reduction in taxes, only a different method of robbery.

Back to Topics
 

There's not really an ounce worth of difference between what they propose and what we propose, or what we end up voting for.  We act like we are doing this big, mean, ugly fight.  We try to draw these distinctive lines, but the lines are really blurred.  Ninety-five percent of it is theater.  When you look in the eyes of the appropriators, I don't see a lot of difference between the Democrats and the Republicans.  When it comes to pork barrel spending, I don't see a big difference here on Capitol Hill.  -- U.S. Representative Matt Salmon (R-AZ) in the Nov. 20, 2000 issue of The New American.

When you consider the record on the following issues, it becomes even more obvious:

Taxing and Spending
*  Both parties have expanded the spending and power of the federal government in spite of promises for a smaller government.  The GOP is for slower expansion.

Right to Life
*  Although the Republican platform purports to be pro-life, the GOP gives financial support to candidates who favor even the most heinous of procedures -- partial birth abortion.  Republican leaders who claim to be pro-life actively campaign for Republicans who support abortion without limitations.
*  In the 1999/2000 fiscal year, domestic Planned Parenthood received $187.3 million from government sources, around two-thirds federal.  Although money to foreign countries has been restricted, some $425 million is still available through U.S. aid for nonsurgical abortions.

National Sovereignty
*  Both parties have supported weapons treaties and alliances which severly damage U.S. security.  Communist China has been rewarded for its hostility and espionage against the U.S. with permanent "Favored Nation" trade status.  Yearly renewal of this status is merely a formality.
*  There has been no significant opposition to activity in U.N. operations where U.S. forces are under foreign command.  Both parties approved payment of billions of dollars in alleged U.N. debts while the U.N. does not credit the U.S. for peacekeeping missions.

Judicial Appointments
*  Roe v. Wade (1973), Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992 - strengthened Roe), and Stenberg v. Carhart (2000 - overturned laws against partial birth abortion) were all decided with large majorities of Republican-appointed judges on the Supreme Court.
*  Appointing judges to uphold the Constitution has only received lip service.  Only one Clinton judge was rejected by the GOP Senate, whereas 374 were approved.  That's only four less than the number approved for Reagan and he had a Senate of his own party for part of his term.  George W. Bush's appointments promise little better for the federal courts.

Gun Control
*  Contrary to promises, the majority-led Congress has not passed any favorable legislation to counteract erosion of Second Amendment rights to own and cary firearms.  Several unfavorable pieces of legislation were passed.

Education
*  Both parties continue to drastically increase the budget of the Department of Education.  Approval of block grants to states are supposed to keep money local but it should have stayed local originally instead of returning with federal strings attached.

Back to Topics
  

Most federal departments, agencies, and regulatory authorities operate unconstitutionally.  The GOP platform opposes one or more of these entities at different times.  However, without the principle of reducing the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries, overall GOP support is for unconstitutional government.

Hundreds of government programs exist to help politicians reward and strengthen their supporters.  Republican office holders are no different than any others.  Politicians force citizens (by taxation) to support selected institutions and organizations which in turn support them.  This means hundreds of billions of dollars of vote-buying and contributor kickbacks which would be difficult to wrench away from the establishment.  Constitutional government would greatly reduce the opportunities for political corruption.

GOP leadership is committed to "moderation," not reformation.

Those who desire reform are not in leadership positions.  The current leadership fills powerful committee chair positions with moderates.  Conservatives hit a "glass ceiling" in the GOP.  The best fundraisers were favored for 2001 chairs in lieu of more important qualifications.

The current leadership grants endorsements and financial support to moderate candidates, ignoring and working against Republican conservative candidates supported by grassroots, conservative field workers.

The GOP is unwilling to nominate a constitutionist for President.  This key position is responsible for many policy decisions and the appointment of numerous other influential positions.

Compromise is standard operating procedure.

The GOP Senate uses something as important as judicial confirmations as bargaining chips.  Only two examples of many are:

The GOP traded 17 judges for Clinton's signature on an appropriations bill in October 1998.  The GOP traded 16 lifetime appointments to the federal bench and 43 other appointments for one term-limited bureaucrat in May 2000 (Smith FEC).  [Source: www.freecongress.org]

With the "big tent" philosophy, the GOP has become a house divided against itself.  There is compromise even before negotiations with those they call "liberals."  The party is composed of people on both sides of definitive issues such as abortion, special rights for homosexuals, and entitlements for big corporations.  Both the Republican-led Congress and the Republican presidencies have been a net loss for conservatives.

Back to Topics
 

The Republican Party was itself a "third party" in 1854 when it was founded.  In 1856 it was defeated with John C. Freemont.  Just four years later, the Republicans defeated the incumbent conservative party, the Whigs, by running a man by the name of Abraham Lincoln.  Lincoln, running in a four-way race, won the electoral college and the presidency even though he wasn't on the ballot in nine states and received 38% of the popular vote.  In 1992, Bill Clinton won the presidency with only 43% of the popular vote.  In 1992, the Constitution Party (then the U.S. Taxpayer Party) secured ballot access in 21 states.  In 1996, the USTP gained ballot access in 39 states, representing 96% of the Electoral College votes.  In 2000, the Constitution Party gained access in 41 states.

Voters say "yes."

Surveys show a steady 15-year increase in the public's desire for a third party.  Three separate, independent surveys¹ show that 40% or more of the public would consider voting third party.  The question is not "Will there be a viable third Party?", but "Will the third party that emerges be one that represents conservatives?"  In a presidential race with more than three candidates, one third of the vote can mean victory.

1  Sources: Vanishing Voter Project, Harvard University, December 1999; Rasmussen Research, www.portraitofamerica.com, March 2000; John Zogby International, September 1999.

Back to Topics
 

A person's vote is truly wasted when he does not use it to express his actual beliefs.  Politicians think they have a mandate when they were actually viewed as the lesser of two evils.

The major parties offer a choice between driving our country over the cliff to ruin at 50 miles per hour or 70 miles per hour.  If the fear of voting third party is maintained, there will never be hope for change or a choice besides the lesser of two evils.  A vote for the Constitution Party now is a vote for the Constitution and an investment in the restoration of the country.

The United States was not founded upon compromise and rationalism but upon the belief that people are accountable to God for the principles they stand for and the people they put in office.  George Washington said at the 1787 Constitutional Convention...

If to please the people we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work?  Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair.  The event is in the hand of God.

More concern with winning and maintaining power than in standing by principle has resulted in compromise by those in office and by those electing them.  It is time to do what is right and leave the results to God.

Back to Topics
 

*  AR  Conservative Party
*  CA  American Independent Party
*  CT  Concerned Citizens Party
*  MI  US Taxpayer Party
*  NV  American Independent Party

Back to Topics
 

How Do I Vote CP in North Carolina?

If we achieve ballot access for this election cycle...

• You will be able to vote for CP candidates by the name "Constitution Party" on the ballot in November.
• You will be able to change your affiliation (on your voter registration) to "Constitution Party," although this is not required to vote for CP candidates.

If we do not achieve ballot access for this election cycle...

• Any candidates we run will be listed as "Independent," and will announce themselves as an "independent candidate running for the Constitution Party."
• We will attempt to register our presidential candidate, Michael Peroutka, as a "write-in" candidate so that people may vote for him.
• You will not be able to register your affiliation with the CP. We recommend, until we gain ballot access, that voters identify themselves as "Unaffiliated," which is an officially recognized affiliation by the Board of Elections.

Back to Topics