Applying
Preamble Balance to Modern American Governance
The Preamble to the American Constitution was written in September 1787 when the Committee of Style, which included Madison, Hamilton, Morris, King and Johnson, discovered that they had not defined the purpose of the seven Articles they had so diligently articulated as the definition of governance powers. After what could easily qualify as ‘soul searching’, the Committee of Style members and others created a short paragraph that compressed the known wisdom of the world at that time into six principles or covenants and started with the now universal “We the People” societal premise. It was written as:
Item (1) is Justice and in this context it meant ‘for all’ which simply didn’t exist anywhere on Earth in 1787. Tranquility could then as now include peace within the soul, within the family and in relations with communities of other people, an item that also didn’t exist anywhere on Earth. Item (3)Common Defense was a nearly universal idea, as was General Welfare(4), that dated back to the humanoid migrations out of Africa a hundred thousand years ago. Indeed, humans would not have survived long without the cooperative nature implied in those two items and most societies disappear in the absence of the two. But the Blessings of Liberty, item (5), was a relatively new concept in 1787 because the idea of an individual citizen not being subordinate to others in terms of his own productivity and life enhancement or wellness had not yet become universal for We the People and still isn’t. These wisdoms had never really been combined in a concept that not only the children of individuals were enhanced as (6)our Posterity, but the structure of We the People as a society was also enhanced in that a positive environment was passed on from generation to generation.
But suppose one applied these six covenants or 'states of existence' as conditions of constitutional governance? Suppose that the covenants, properly weighted according to Justice and Liberty, were applied to legislation in various congresses of the Americans? Could an analytical process using modern scientific methodology give relative meaning to legislation so that any individual had a minimal We the People understanding of the purpose of legislation? How many appropriations or regulations to nowhere would be eliminated by a Preamble Balance litmus test?
A Current Litmus Test of Preamble Balance.
Try the current conditions involved in the so-called ‘ tax cuts’ extension being considered in Congress as a Preamble Balance test. Problem: the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, although originally justified because of a (3 )CD and (4)GW surplus, the process eventually, along with serious (1), (3), (4) waste of $500 billion over ten years, caused a much higher deficit that seriously effected all six covenants, especially (6)Posterity. If the tax rates are allowed to return to the previous levels, it would look something like:
Tax rate of 10% goes to 15%, 1 out of 5 people, revenue up $4 billion.
15% stays 15%, 2 out of 5 people and revenue up $40 billion (income increases).
25% goes to 28%, 20 million people, revenue up $30 billion (rate and income increases).
28% rate goes to 31%, 3.6 million people, revenue up $6 billion.
33% becomes 36%, 1.4 million people, revenue up $9 billion.
35% goes to 39.6%, 800,000 people, an increase of $22 billion (rate and income increases).
Suppose one attaches a ‘weight factor’ to each of the six covenants of negative six to positive six to each of the tax conditions above. The weight factor is arbitrary; it could have been plus or minus ten or a hundred. The objective is to show graphically what each of the six covenants might look like in relation to each other as a six sided balance mechanism. Not easy and purely subjective in many cases. But still a reference point based on the Constitution’s preamble.
The 15% rate might have values of J:+2, T:-2, CD:+3, GW:+2, L:-5, P:+1
The 28% rate becomes: J:-1, T:-3, CD:+3, GW:+2, L:-4, P:+4
The 31% rate appears as: J:+1, T:-3, CD:+2, GW:+3, L:-3, P:+4
The 36% rate becomes: J:+1, T:-2, CD:+3, GW:+3, L:-2, P:+4
The 39.6% rate tops out as: J:-1, T:-1, CD:+4, GW:+3, L:-1, P:+5
A
middle taxpayer example: A person might attempt in
a given year to balance conditions so that Liberty , or
the loss of freedom due to the tax rate, and the loss of
Tranquility due to the process don't exceed the GW and
CD necessities of the United States. The GW and CD
might lead to a Posterity of +4 under Balance
imperatives or conditions.
He would also have to visualize whether Justice was
served for all, noting that Justice through a law system
is also an obligation that might be very negative at
times. Many of the problems with visualizing the
relationships are due to the two year election cycle
which makes Posterity very difficult to calculate,
especially if the needs of other areas are also
considered as part of the Nation. Is it possible
for three or four million taxpayers to agree of a
Posterity of +4 if Liberty is going to be -3 and
Tranquility is going to be -3? That is why the
Constitution defined Representatives for consensus.
If a
member of a legislature represented a constituency
somewhere in the USA and most of his constituency
were in
the 15% bracket, he might have a different Preamble
Balance matrix than one who has mostly 39% voters. But
would any other Elected be required to consider a matrix in which
the 15%
voters wanted a J:+4, CD:-5, GW:+6, and P:-4 set? That
is, a poor area may feel entitled to a high Justice and
General Welfare value at the expense of Common Defense. Would
any other Elected need to consider a matrix in which the
39% voters of a district thought it should be : J:+4,
T:+2, CD:+6, GW:-5, L:+5,
and P:-1 where their high Justice and Liberty meant a
low General Welfare and maybe a low Common Defense?
If Electeds in the future apply Preamble Balance testing to each appropriation or regulatory process, they must arrive at a We the People consensus, especially if there are many people and candidates watching the process. That is a revolution that actually returns to the original defined purposes of the Constitution.
The Preamble Balance Litmus TEST:
Did the Candidate ever
advocate some personal value that did not reflect at
least one of the six covenants?
Did the Candidate
ever vote for an appropriation clause in a
legislature that did not reflect benefit to other areas
of the Nation or state or other counties in
accordance with the 'uniform' principle?
Did the candidate routinely take
advice from persons who had not sworn allegiance to the
Constitution?
Did the candidate ever
introduce or advocate legislation that attached unusual
values to interests outside of Common Defense or
General Welfare?
Does an Elected have a voting record of combining
Liberty with any expenditure he was responsible for
through his committee participation. That is, was
Liberty, Justice and Posterity taken into account in his
analysis of a problem?
Note that the Balance Litmus test does not in any way make an evaluation of a candidate's moral, ethical, spiritual, educational, or life style attributes, only the degree of adherence to Preamble Balance. Obviously, personal power agendas could change that adherence, but the test should not be life style judgmental. Virtually any personal act can be portrayed as negative or positive but not affect an adherence to Preamble Balance. Most Americans instinctively understand this and generally forgive 'sins' that don't involve betrayal of the constitution.
The
Geometry of the Constitution.
How it can be visualized
in its complexity
Tetrahedrons, a
pyramid with four identical surfaces, can be combined into
many visual forms and have combinations in nearly all sciences and
even nuclear structures. They are used to
visualize complex relationships in art and sometimes
as representations of genetic interaction. In this
particular usage, the six major parameters of the American
Constitution's Preamble are represented as interconnected
tetrahedrons that are then visualized in value based dynamic
systems. The visualization is purely subjective and is
intentionally designed to allow any person to assign values
to the six components of the Preamble in order to balance
them against each other in a dynamic system of priorities. An
individual could even attach value to each of the membranes
within a tetrahedron if desired, with the same membrane
(such as 'civil rights' or 'species rights') attached to
several covenants.
The citizen would then be an 'advocate' of (1) and (4).
These tetrahedrons are used to show relationships between objects with
different value systems. In this case, six
tetrahedrons are used to form a larger structure that might
be relevant to an individual. He looks at the
problem, sees it as relevant to Balance as (1),
(4), and (5). He can then add a value of up to
plus six or subtract a value down to minus six such as:
J:+2, GW:+4 and L:-2.
But note the above structure when other peoples'
perception of Preamble Balance states are included.
In that case, a citizen can mark off the relevance of
other states to what he perceives as 'balance' For those who say there is no possible compromise on
anything , look again.
Justice
or fairness between individuals is so fundamental to
human life that it is possible that humanity
couldn't have come into existence without it.
It establishes the conditions under which people
live in peace with each other. 
Tranquility, or 'insure domestic tranquility'
in
the Preamble meant peace between the various states
of the new Union. Historically, tranquility
has also meant a state of mind very close to that
found in the spiritual meditation of virtually
all religions. But 'tranquility' within
a family or community is also fundamental to a
growing, dynamic society.
Common
Defense is an obvious process that human cave tribes
practiced thousands of years ago and involved people
defending each other against predators, including
people, that appeared
among them. In the modern sense, CD means
allocating resources to maintain enough
security so that the other covenants can take hold
and flourish. Predatory attacks almost always
come from societies or cults that do not have a form
of Preamble Balance.
General
Welfare means that many societal processes such as
food, clothing, shelter and even spiritual wellness
are maintained in order to enhance the
structure of the society. 'General' means for
large segments of people, not individuals, and
'Welfare' has an ancient meaning in nearly all
societies that one is 'better off' than he was.
This means that the minimum 'fare' of
citizens within the American society is
increased over time without sacrificing Justice and
Liberty for others. 
Liberty
is the combination of freedoms that allow an
individual being to enhance himself and others
within a human society. Liberty is
altruistically given away in the form of personal
wealth or energy, but also sometimes as lives, to maintain the other social
covenants of America. It is a balanced
component, neither total for the individual or
totally removable for the American society.
Posterity is
the time covenant that gives purpose to the
other covenants. It means passing positive
values on to the next generation or allowing the
other covenants to be positive for one's children.
Preamble Balance would mean the process of living from one minute
to the next is meaningless in terms of the Posterity
covenant. 
memepriv
2008-2010, Robert J. Thayer, et al