Last week, as print and online readers were digesting this series preamble, Rasmussen was updating polling data confirming that “two-out-of-three voters think Americans are overtaxed.”

Cutting the same survey data with a different knife, Rasmussen reports that “79 percent of mainstream voters think Americans are overtaxed,” but – get ready for this – that “87 percent of those in the political class don’t share that assessment” or view.

In other words, four-out-of-five citizens want fewer taxes, and lower tax rates, while nine-in-ten of “those in the political class” seem to think the common folk’s money is theirs for the taking.

Can you smell their thinking, “How dare the common folk wanting to keep more of their hard-earned money?”

But there’s more.

Significantly, less than “3 in 10 (28 percent) voters believe the federal government today ‘has the consent of the governed.’”

That startling statistic is indeed eye opening. It also confirms the arrogance of the disconnected.

All of this confirms the need to restructure government in order to significantly reduce excessive taxing and spending by government as administered by the out of touch political class elites.

How to proceed?

The goal must be to fund only those essential duties that flow from responsibilities constitutionally authorized to each specific level of government.

For that, the U.S. Supreme Court must play the key role.

For example, in every instance in which the Constitution does not specifically assign to federal government a delineated responsibility, then bureaucrats and political careerists in Washington should be specifically prohibited from venturing into that realm.

But, as we know, the federal level of government has been expanding for generations.

So, in any instance in which federal operatives go beyond the bounds of clear constitutional authority, then plaintive filings in our judicial system must automatically activate injunctive stay from the date of such filing in the judicial system through a final U.S. Supreme Court resolution.

Clearly, to manage any such situations in some other manner is tantamount to providing federal politicians and executive agencies the opportunity to arbitrarily expand their reach, authority and impact.

Issues of constitutionality should never be delayed, put off, or forced to work their way up through the federal court system.

Further, any current or future jurist on our nation’s highest court who cannot decide on the original intent embedded in the Constitution regarding delineated federal responsibilities should resign. That a final decision on the legitimacy of federal health care legislation was kicked down the road by the Supreme Court may be a bad omen signaling that individual freedom may be shrinking further.

How can we shrink the size and scope of federal government, reduce operating costs, tax systems and tax rates?

Regular readers of this column will recall a series on the IRS and federal income tax system. As I noted then, at 115,000 employees and growing – the IRS has more employees than Microsoft and Intel combined. The IRS also has more employees than the CIA and FBI combined. You get the picture.

Operating costs, citizen privacy, and personal liberty are put at risk.

Here’s another approach.

Implementing this change both realigns constitutional authority and places costs and operating expenses where they properly should be – closest to the people actually served.

Each state directly pays the salaries and any benefits – including all travel expenses – for both U.S. Senators representing that state as well as the salaries, benefits, and all operating expenses for all office staff at any and all offices in Washington D.C. and back in the home state. The same funding process should be used for representatives sent to the U.S. House.

With local folk directly paying all costs it should surprise no one when both senators and representatives begin spending more time back home in their state and districts.

Getting away from the centrality of funding our states' representatives to the federal legislative branch is another first step in realigning the structure of government.

Part three of this series continues next week.

Richard Olivastro is president of Olivastro Communications and founder of Citizens for Change. A professional member of the National Speakers Association, he is available pro bono for charitable fundraisers and public forums and can be reached via email at  RichOlivastro@gmail.com or by phone at 1-877-RichSpeaks.