The foundational premise of those who claim to be a Federationist draws from a First Principle:

• You, and only you, own your person.

From this First Principle along with The Declaration and Constitution we generate the following which are the only logical conclusion that can be reached:

• Everyone owns their own body, has a right to choose what happens to it, and is responsible for what happens to it.
  
  
• Government's only just and rational function is to enforce a prohibition against the initiation of force or fraud upon another.

These First Principles inherently flow from The Declaration's statement that among unalienable rights are that to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit, but not assurance, of Happiness, as protected by The Constitution.

From the above two principles we inherently must support all of the following, provided that no violation of another person's rights occurs.

• Personal autonomy means what it says, but does not include the right to rob others to support one's choices. While eating until you weigh 500lbs is bad for you, it's your body. While consuming drugs of any sort (tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, etc) are bad for you, it's your body. While certain sexual practices are quite dangerous, it's your body. While choosing not to exercise could result in a shorter life, it's your body. While choosing not to spend any money on medical insurance could result in your death if you cannot afford to purchase required medical care for cash, it's your body. Federationists must respect personal autonomy and refuse to force others to pay for personal choice, irrespective of whether that choice was a positive one (e.g. the decision to use drugs or overeat) or a negative one (the choice to not buy medical insurance.)
  
  
• You have the right to own and enjoy personal property without interference. If you own your body then you own the fruits of your labor. Taxation that rests upon the acquisition of personal property represents a claim that one obtains more value from government predicated on your ownership of said property. This is a dangerously-false premise. Property tax upon real estate, for example, presumes that the wealthy man with a $1 million house receives more value from the schools than someone who has a $100,000 house. There is no evidence to support this position; the person with a $100,000 house may and probably does have as many children consuming that resource as does the $1 million house's owner. Likewise, taxation predicated upon income is a declaration that one receives more value from government based on their earnings. History, however, shows that what actually happens is that the wealthy effectively buy government. Therefore, taxation should be predicated on the voluntary act of consumption.
  
  
• That which you own you have a right to dispose of however you wish so long as doing so does not violate anyone else's rights. As just one example the current medical cost inflation problem is largely a consequence of special privileges accorded to drug and device makers allowing them to prevent the re-importation of their drugs and devices. This turns the premise of ownership of private property on its ear; a person who purchases a drug has a right to dispose of it as he wishes, including across an international boundary. Abuse of these laws has led to drugs and devices being sold at ten or even one hundred times the price in other nations here in the United States, all manufacturered by the same firm, effectively forcing Americans to cover the entire development cost of new treatments that then inure to the benefit of everyone worldwide. Property that is purchased and owned by a person must be within their right to dispose of as they see fit.
  
  
• You have an unalienable right to self-defense. A right to "life" without the the right to defend that life is no right at all. You therefore have an unalienable right to keep and bear arms as codified in the Second Amendment. Since your right is subject to only to your inability to impose it upon others by force or fraud, you therefore have the right to possess and bear arms as you wish, openly or concealed, except where the owner of private property bars same. Where your "castle" is extended (e.g. your vehicle) you therefore may also carry a weapon in your vehicle even upon a private parking lot, so long as the weapon does not exit the vehicle without consent of the owner of the property. A Federationist may not support a "permitting" system to keep and/or bear arms as one does not need a permit to exercise a right, only a privilege.
  

• The Second Amendment stands as the final guardian of all other rights declared in The Declaration of Independence and guarded by The Constitution. The Second Amendment was not inserted into The Constitution to protect sport shooting, hunting, or the right of self-defense; all three are beneficial side effects. Rather, The Second Amendment was clearly, from the historical record in The Federalist and The Anti-Federalist, collections of the writings of the Founders, placed into The Constitution as a final defense of the people against tyranny by government, originating either within or beyond our borders. Indeed, without The Second Amendment the Colonies refused to adopt The Constitution. The Second Amendment, as with all rights, is an individual right protected by, not bestowed by, government. So long as The Second Amendment stands tyranny cannot be imposed upon the people.
  
  
• You have an unalienable right of travel, as a citizen of the United States, within the United States. A right to "liberty" without the right to change your location is no right at all. You therefore have an unalienable right to travel personally and with your personal property upon public roads for private, non-commercial purposes without being "licensed", as again a license is a privilege, using the common modes of transportation for the day. A Federationist may therefore not support "Driver Licenses" or similar constraints for other than commercial uses of the roads. However, the exercise of this right does not release one from the harm that is done to others as a consequence of negligence; a person remains fully liable for same and a failure to discharge that responsibility can and should be punished with both civil and, where negligence rises to a criminal standard of conduct and proof, criminal sanction.
  
  
• The 4th Amendment means what it says. If you have a right to travel then you also have a right to do so without government searches of your person and property absent probable cause. The TSA is a wanton and outrageous violation of the 4th Amendment. Airlines have a significant property interest in their airplanes not being blown up, and also in not being sued due to negligence should a terrorist get on board with a weapon or bomb. The TSA not only violates your rights it shields the airlines from having to compensate your family if they are negligent in allowing a terrorist on board with a gun or explosive device! The airline has every right to demand you submit to a private search before boarding their aircraft. The Government, absent probable cause, has no right to search you at all. This same prohibition must extend to "warrantless wiretaps" and other forms of search and seizure, whether of person, property or communication. If there is probable cause for a search then the government can present its evidence to a Judge and obtain a proper and lawful warrant. Absent a valid warrant or beyond its lawful boundary (e.g. if executed upon the wrong residence) the entry is unlawful and, if entry is forcible such an entry is in fact an armed invasion.
  
  
• The 5th Amendment means what it says, and only persons can commit and be charged with offenses - not things. The practice of "civil forfeiture" in all of its forms is an affront to the Constitution and must be barred. Property is incapable of an offense as it is inanimate. To seize property of any sort the government must first, as the 5th Amendment provides, prove that an actual crime took place and levy the penalty as a fine or forfeiture as a penalty for the act that the person or corporation has been previously convicted of.
  
  
• The 14th Amendment means what it says. Equal protection under the laws is not a snappy slogan. It is a civil right. The current practice of permitting insider trading by Representatives and Senators is a direct affront to the Constitution and must end. Likewise, there can be no civil or criminal immunity for a police officer who oversteps his lawful authority (e.g. by no-knock entering the wrong house); such an event is a criminal felonious invasion and should injury or death to the occupants result the police officers involved must face charges identical to those brought against a random person who performs the same act.
  
  
• Federationists must support a private right of action against actors who commit force or fraud upon the public. The last four years have made clear that the "collective" bringing of charges is insufficient protection against these evils. The United States had a history of Citizen-convened Grand Juries. This right must be restored.
  
  
• We have a collective right to a secure border, the immediate withdrawal of all social and other benefits and the immediate deportation of illegal immigrants, without exception. That which is public property is owned collectively by the citizens of this nation. We establish and permit the existence of government to collectively manage those public resources, including land, water, roads, the resources held in the ground and the taxes collected government for the exclusive benefit of the nation's citizens. These resources belong on a collective, indivisible basis to the citizens of this nation and illegal immigrants inherently violate those property rights simply by their presence.. America is a nation of legal immigrants; unless you are a native American you are descended from immigrants. But virtually all, until recently, came here invited to both better themselves and society as a whole. An "uninvited" guest is not a guest or an immigrant, he or she is an invader and is initiating force upon every citizen of this nation by their mere presence, along with initiating force against those who are seeking to become citizens through legal means. Federationists must demand and support the arrest and deportation of all illegal invaders and immediate cessation of all handouts and social benefits to those who are in this nation unlawfully.
  
  
• The Government has no right to interfere with what happens in a private home or bedroom between consenting adults. There is no justification for the "Defense of Marriage Act" as the government has no right to regulate this consensual adult conduct in the first place. Federationists must support the removal of all Federal recognition of marital or partnership status of any sort. If you wish to get married, go see a Priest. If you wish to set forth your living arrangements in a contract, including your agreement on raising children together, that is a private contractual matter and must be respected. Adjudication of what a marriage is and is not is a Sacramental matter and properly is and should be solely between celebrants and their faith. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from recognizing an establishment of religion; it therefore may not judge one form of Sacrament as superior to another and protect one with legal privilege while punishing another with legal sanction.
  
  
• The current practice of linking parental income and assets to adult children's educational opportunities must be ended. All persons reach adulthood at 18 years of age. Requiring parents to disclose and contribute to their adult offspring's higher education is indefensible, and considering their assets and income in educational scholarship, grant and loan programs is an outrage. At the age of 18 a former child may leave home and his parents have no right to further restraint on his or her movement. Likewise, a parent may eject an 18 year old from the family residence. With rights come responsibilities; forced responsibility without rights is slavery. All forms of association between adults are, as a matter of first principles, to be on a voluntary basis.
  
  
• The use of the eminent domain power must be restricted to actual public uses, and effective takings must be compensated. The Constitution permits the taking of private property for public use, provided the owner is compensated at fair market value. But Kelo along with other acts and decisions have turned this principle on its ear, with "public use" meaning "greater tax revenue potential." The power of eminent domain must be restored to its rightful Constitutional limitations, such that only actual public uses, such as a public road, a library, school, fire station or similar uses are permissible. In addition zoning and land-use changes, including those resulting from an environmental finding, that result in an effective "taking" of the formerly-permitted use of the land must trigger the eminent domain right of compensation.
  
  
• Trade with nations that are effective equals can and should be on free and open terms. Exploitation is neither "free" or "fair." Nations that employ effective slave labor tactics (e.g. China), steal intellectual property or despoil the environment to obtain their "advantage" are not competing on a fair and free playing field. The proper response to these activities is tariffs recovering the difference for the US Treasury that is otherwise lost to these unfair trade practices..
  
  
• Bailing out private enterprise in any form is theft from the taxpayer; those who demand such must be treated as thieves and prosecuted, not rewarded. Private enterprise and capitalism includes not only the right to fail but the duty to fail when bad decisions are made. When banks and others make bad decisions and find themselves insolvent they have nobody to blame but themselves. Market discipline demands that such failures be allowed to occur.
  
  
• Creation of unbacked credit and monetary inflation are both theft by counterfeiting of the nation's money and must be severely punished. A loan against nothing (such as a credit card) but the promise to pay in the future is an effective naked short against the currency of the nation. Such an act is inherently inflationary and debases the money by pretending that there is more money in the system than actually exists. Unbacked loans must be made only from actual capital from investors who loan their accumulated capital and not created from thin air. Likewise, intentional inflation debases the nation's money. These acts are in fact theft from the citizens who have saved value from their personal production in excess of their living requirements and must be treated as felonies. Federationists stand for sound money - not through the chimera and false God of a "Gold Standard" but rather by prosecuting fraudulent acts in the banking and credit system.