Home | Cause | Timeline | Criminal| Civil | Resolution | Final Judgments | Constitutional Right | Links

September 9, 2014

TO: Senate Business & Commerce Committee

RE: Insurance – Constitutionally Required VS. Discretionary

Dear Senator,

Today you participate as a member of the Committee discussing discretionary insurance coverage provided, in part, by the government of Texas. The insurance on the agenda is discretionary.

I pray you will give consideration to the insurance that is mandated by our Texas Constitution. That is, Insurance required by Constitutional Law but forgotten and no longer honored.

Originally our Texas Constitution required that persons employed in positions of public trust be bonded. The word 'bonded' was the word utilized at the time as a reference to what today is known as 'insurance'. The bond insures that persons harmed by an error or ommission of the bonded person would have restitution for their property loss and other damages. Just as an auto insurance policy insures those injured or damaged by the policy holder.

Among those for whom a bond was required (mandated) by the Law of our Texas Constitution were Prosecutors and Judges. The intent was to make whole a citizen who suffers property loss and harm due to error, ommission, or malfeasance of these State Actors. The government of our Texas no longer requires these public servants to purchase a professional insurance policy (a bond), or what today is known in the industry as errors and ommisions insurance for professionals and executives. Initially the State would purchase the bond as a benefit of employment. Then this was discontinued under the belief the government has sufficient resources to self-insure these actors. But today the mandated insurance coverage (the Bond) is no longer provided to the people and Citizens on our great land of Texas. We, the People of Texas, are left without the protection of the Law on a land devoid of Liberty. These professionals in positions of public trust, with compensation and benfits from our public treasury, can commit errors, ommissions, and acts malfeasance. We are then told they have immunity and their employing entity as sovereign immunity. See for more

This defeats the purpose for government. Our organic law says "to preserve these rights, governments are instituted among men by consent of the governed". This mandates the government insure us for damage to our property and our persons when government fails to preserve our rights from the errors, omissions, or malfeasance of those who act in the name of government.

I am a victim of error, if not malfeasance, by State Actors operating under title of Prosecutors and Judges. This is a fact of public record that no objectively reasonable, unbiased, person can deny. This is also an adjudicated fact. It is a fact that the State (the government) has acknowledged. My property loss (the taking) I suffered due to their errors is also a fact of public record and adjudicated. The taking (a “taking” includes property taken by damage & destruction) by the government entity known as the State of Texas is not questioned or disputed by the Attorney General. To the contrary, it has been admitted to and stipulated to by the Attorney General. See the attached Final Judgment. What the Office of the Attorney General has argued is that the government is above the law. Rather than call it for what it is they say the government has sovereign immunity. The only exception is if the Legislature grants permission to a injured person to bring a lawsuit upon the government. Otherwise, the courts are closed to our petitions for redress.

I humbly ask you to honor your Oath of Office in this upcoming session. Please preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution by paying the claims upon the State for the errors of actors the State bonds or, in other words, provides insurance to cover those harmed by their errors.

Thank You, Ed Heimlich, a Citizen of Texas –,

Return to Links