Justin Jelincic


Remembering History


To Guide the Future

Candidate for California's 13th Congressional District

 Serving humanity six days a week and my Lord Jesus Christ at all times.
(Acts 20:24)

Providing Choice

I am running to ALLOW Democrats to have a Choice.   The Party has chosen to marginalize many Democrats who are not part of the Insider power base.  The Party Insiders want to limit competition and choose for you.  They want you to re-elect the incumbent to maximize party power.  They would rather you be stuck without a choice, than risk having a “Freshman” representative.  That Freshman representative would have the same voting power, so the real issue is Party loyalty, not voting power. 

The Party leadership know whom they control.  If the seat is under Democratic Party control, they seek to limit your choice.  When there is a Democratic incumbent, they want the primary ballot to only have that name, and so we are stuck with incumbents as our only choice in the primary.

I am running to give you a choice.  Two years ago, I was nominated by citizens who wanted a choice.  My name was placed next to Pete Stark for the 13th district.  I had no campaign war chest.  I ran no advertisements.  Simply because my name was on the ballot 9,021 people were allowed to say it was time to end politics as usual in the California 13th Congressional District.

I know you have noticed that Barack is running without opposition.  Now that we know how he as performed, would Hilary win the nomination if her name was a choice in 2012?

I want choice.  Democracy is about choice, not about the Party leaders, or the powerful interests who direct them.

I once again offer you my name as a choice in the CA 13th  Congressional District for 2012.

I promise I will be a REPRESENTATIVE, not a CONGRESSMAN.  I have noticed that we elect people to the House of Representatives, but they call themselves Congressmen.  I do not hear US Senators call themselves Congressmen.  Congress is BOTH the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives.   I believe anyone who calls themselves Congressman is giving you a clue that they want to represent Congress to you, rather than you to Congress.  Avoid all Congressman, elect a REPRESENTATIVE.  back to top

Bill of Rights

Remember the Bill of Rights?   Actually I think most people do not.  Many remember part of the Bill of Rights but do not remember why they were placed before the States for adoption immediately upon the formation of the first Congress. 

Read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, they tell you why they were needed. It was imperative to protect the citizens of the United States from the newly formed Federal government. Democratically elected bodies did not guarantee freedom.  The new Federal government was feared to have the potential to become just a variation on the form of government they had just fought to gain independence from by engaging in a War for Independence. 

Without clearly declaring and protecting their rights from Federal abuse, they understood they were at risk.  Majority rule could lead to Minority abuse.  Below is the preamble and the 10 rights secured by the Bill of Rights.  Note that numbers 9 and 10 were clear efforts to LIMIT the Federal government, and RETAIN to the citizens and states, any right not granted to the Federal government.   Government BY the People, FOR the People, meant the People chose what Rights to surrender to the Government, not the other way around.

back to top

The Bill of Rights: A Transcription

The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

Amendment I                             back to top

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V                        back to top

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX                         back to top

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


Federal Powers

The Federal Government has in many ways become the government the Founding Fathers feared when they demanded the adoption of a Bill of Rights.

If you elect me as your representative I will always ask FIRST, why is this a Federal matter.  Government solutions should be provided by the government agency closest to the People who are impacted by the issue being solved.

The Federal government should NOT make life easy for Business interests, by creating a national regulation, when local autonomy can be allowed, and the consequences impact local citizens only.

Federal government should NOT dictate what contents will be in a private employer’s agreement with their employees.  There are no federal consequences, if the employer does not have a federal function.

Federal government should NOT dictate local building codes.  There are no federal consequences, if a local building code varies from one place to another.

Federal government should NOT dictate what products are allowed to be manufactured and sold within any State. They have an duty under Article I, Section 8.3  To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; 

This is NOT a duty to regulate Commerce within each State.    back to top


[It Matters]