Have Legal Questions? Ask a Lawyer Now.
You do not have a lawsuit.
You were in a bid procedure, which is at the discretion of the Marine Corps to accept or not.
A presidential order does not provide a private company with standing to sue
And since you were only in the bid process, you do not have a contract under which you could allege suit.
So unless the Marine Corp violated the bidding procedures which you submitted under, then you have no standing to do anything
I've waited for your response, but I haven't seen anything
I would like to find a Constitutional basis for reducing oil consumption
I'm not sure I follow
You want to know if there is a constitutional basis for reducing oil consumption?
As background The Joint Forces Command issued the following warning to all US military commands:
"By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels per day."
"A severe energy crunch is inevitable without a massive expansion of production and refining capacity. While it is difficult to predict precisely what economic, political, and strategic effects such a shortfall might produce, it surely would reduce the prospects for growth in both the developing and developed worlds. Such an economic slowdown would exacerbate other unresolved tensions, push fragile and failing states further down the path toward collapse, and perhaps have serious economic impact on both China and India. At best, XXXXX XXXXX lead to periods of harsh economic adjustment. To what extent conservation measures, investments in alternative energy production, and efforts to expand petroleum production from tar sands and shale would mitigate such a period of adjustment is difficult to predict. One should not forget that the Great Depression spawned a number of totalitarian regimes that sought economic prosperity for their nations by ruthless conquest."
"Energy production and distribution infrastructure must see significant new investment if energy demand is to be satisfied at a cost compatible with economic growth and prosperity."
"The discovery rate for new petroleum and gas fields over the past two decades (with the possible exception of Brazil) provides little reason for optimism that future efforts will find major new fields."
Foward by General James N Mattis
I am a West Point grad and 8 year Infantry veteran. I understand how the mili
West Point is a great school
One of the best in the country
and in the world
I understand the military and how it can increase its mission effectiveness by reducing oil requirement. Currently we use 22 gallons of oil per soldier per day, 40% of deaths are associated with delivering oil.
So, have you taken any kind of constitutional law courses? How deep is your understanding of constitutional law?
It is a great school and a perfect place for me.
I have studied the Constitution, Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers extensively in my effort to deploy JPods networks.
ok. I can tell you off the top of my head that I cannot think of a constitutional claim you can legally make to force the Military to use JPods Inc...but lets talk about this
What do you believe is the constitutional issue
www.jpods.com are solar-powered transportation networks (patent 6,180,817). They are essentially a physical version of the Internet, the integration of railroads and computer networks.
let me look at the website...you've whetted my curiousity
The barrier to deployment is government monopoly of transportation infrastructure.
I do not want to force them to use JPods. I would like to force them to grant rights of way to anyone willing to build transportation networks that exceed 120 passenger miles per gallon and build them with private capital.
OK...But this is because the government is the only entity which has the power to take land for public use.
In other words, the government has the right of emminent domain
A private citizen does not have this power, thus the monopoly
And this is a power specifically provided for in the Constitution
The government grants non-exclusive access to public rights of way for power companies, taxis, etc...
We only need the same access granted power, communications and taxis to use right of way.
The 1934 Communications Act recognized that networks were in the general welfare and common defense.
The question you are asking is how can you force the government to allow you to implement the JPODs right?
In 1984 communications infrastructure was returned to a free market.
so you want to find a way to get an easement essentially.
Millions of jobs, vast innovation and better service at lower costs resulted.
Similar, FedEx and UPS broke the postal monopoly
True, but this was only after the government provided AT&T a monopoly to build the infrastructure that everything else relies on today
Currently the government monopoly over transportation infrastructure made oil the lifeblood of our economy.
The unintended consequence is civilization killers of Peak Oil, Debt, Climate Change and Food Bubble.
i'm following you...and I get what you're saying.
Maybe we should frame it more like the railway system
It was in the mobilization to fight World War I that communications, power and transportation were monopolized/socialized as "natural monopolies."
the government gives a monopoly to commuter rails servers
The JPODs system seems more akin to a hybrid rail system than to the public highway system.
The Constitution limits the government to regulate not manage.
Theoretically that is true, but the extension of power through the interpretation of the Commerce Clause has really made it were we are a managed system rather than simply regulated.
It mandates providing defense, Peak Oil and Climate Change are threats to security. We have been actively engaged since 1990 in defending oil supply lines.
It is the network that matters.
Well meaning, central planners strive for consistency.
So you want to force access to the network...essentially obtaining an easement along the highway system to build the JPOD syteme?
They made the highway the answer to everything causing the loss of thousands of miles of railroads.
And the advent of cheap oil and automobiles
It was good at the time...but now we are running out...I am with you.
Force access to rights of way based on exceeding performance standards http://www.jpods.com/PerformanceStandard_1.html
But the issue is can you force the government to do anything about it specifically...right?
OK...lets cover some basics.
I have access to rights of way in China.
The Constitution provides you with certain rights, and if the government violates those rights, then you may use the legal system to correct the violation
However, if the government acts in a way that is simply wrong, but not violating a personal right, then the answer is not through the legal system, but the political system
In other words, you have to make Congress Act...not by suing, but by lobbying representatives
Yes, I have talked to 97 Senate staffs. The problem with this is local transportation is really a local issue. The monopolization of transportation at the Federal level resulted from a long drift of events.
But the result is local officials, do not do anything where there are not Federal dollars. Even if it is privately financed. It is very odd.
ok...I'm running short on time with you. So, while I do enjoy chatting about the subject, if you have a specific legal question I can address, then please ask it.
If you or anyone you know wants to set a legal precedent pass www.jpods.com to them. Thanks Bill James
thanks for chat and good luck with the project. I'll keep you in mind and if I find out anything that could help I'll pass it along to you.
If you are satisfied with this service, please accept my answer so that I may be paid for my work. Good luck and best wishes.
Thanks, XXXXX XXXXX information is listed at the web site. We
I will accept you effort. Thanks