Most informed citizens know the Bill of Rights has ten amendments; nowadays, though, not much attention is paid to the Tenth Amendment. You remember, the one that says,
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.
Most folks these days don’t know that’s in the Constitution—but then, to all intents and purposes, our government doesn’t either. (The same is true of the Ninth Amendment, which declares, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”)
Now, however, we have the first sign in a very long time that that might be about to change. If Congress won’t recognize the proper sphere of sovereignty of the states, some of the states are thinking about standing up to claim it for themselves.
Although Fox News and CNN are not telling you about it, a growing number of states are declaring sovereignty. Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, and Georgia have all introduced bills and resolutions declaring sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering such measures.
Here’s the payoff from the bill introduced in the state of Washington, which follows a number of “Whereas” clauses laying out the historical and constitutional justifications for the bill:
NOW, THEREFORE, Your Memorialists respectfully resolve:
(1) That the State of Washington hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and
(2) That this serve as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States established it and to cease and desist, effective immediately, any and all mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.
That’s just one example; go to the article and you’ll find links to all the bills that are currently pending in state legislatures. Knowing my old home state as I do, I’ll be surprised if that one passes, but some of these will. Of course, I’m sure the initial response from the Obama administration will be to dismiss or ignore these bills; but if these states have the guts to act on this language and resist (or even seek to roll back) the federal usurpation of state power, we have a shot at reviving federalism. After all, the Tenth Amendment may be treated like a dead letter, but it’s still in the Constitution; the Obama administration may succeed in buying states off, but if any of them hang in there and refuse to give up their Tenth Amendment claim, as long as they pick an issue on which they’re on firm ground, it would be hard to make a constitutional case against them.
It’s encouraging to see state governments asserting themselves as independent and responsible political entities, rather than as lapdogs of D.C.; here’s hoping it keeps up.
Crossposted at The Spyglass
Aaron Gardner
Moe Lane
Steve Maley
KnightsofMalta
Dan Spencer
Dan McLaughlin
Are we?
CarlSchurz (Diary) Tuesday, February 10th at 8:41PM EST (link)Laying the path for a ‘counter’ revolution? Secession if you will?
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
You're conflating, I think
theancientmariner (Diary) Tuesday, February 10th at 8:45PM EST (link)Secession isn’t what’s in view here–merely rebalancing the proper relationship between the national government and the states, and moving us back toward a truly federal system..
recommend, power of X -nt
DONTREADONME (Diary) Tuesday, February 10th at 8:57PM EST (link)I don't know anyone
izoneguy (Diary) Tuesday, February 10th at 8:58PM EST (link)who would want to give up their freedom for some new water mains and some nice roads???
The point cannot be made often enough: Modern liberalism, as embodied in the Obama presidency, is the defender of the status quo. And the status quo is a road to economic ruin. Political forces cannot redistribute the wealth that the economic system does not produce.
One would hope not, but
theancientmariner (Diary) Tuesday, February 10th at 10:17PM EST (link)throwing money at politicians does have a way of changing their priorities.
They might
Rod_Patrick (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 11:40AM EST (link)especially if they realize later that they will inherit “huge debt” by accepting money for new roads and new water mains.
need links to the bills
Beaglescout (Diary) Wednesday, February 11th at 1:57AM EST (link)can you provide some links for all this?
“A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.”
Links to the bills
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 11th at 9:30AM EST (link)are in the original article, but I can repost them here. (Note: the link on Oklahoma is not to the bill, but to a blog post.)
Washington
New Hampshire
Arizona
Montana
Michigan
Missouri
Oklahoma
California
Georgia
Secession is not currently in the offing
UpLateAgain (Diary) Thursday, February 12th at 1:45PM EST (link)The question however, as to how the states (and more importantly, their aware citizens) that sue the Feds for their 9th and 10th amendment rights will react when the Feds shut them down can lead to some interesting speculation. Many states (Texas immediately comes to mind) have had insignificant secessionist movements for some time. I don’t see those doing anything but growing as things are developing now. Whether they’ll ever get large enough to be even newsworthy remains to be seen….. but the term “revolution” is being mentioned more and more frequently in the blogospere, and NOT merely by fringe radicals in fringe radical blogs. I suspect things are going to get VERY messy in the next couple of years
You never never never actually need a gun, until you need a gun, and then nothing else will do.
Perhaps
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 9:14AM EST (link)Personally, I think it’s more likely that people will succeed in reshaping the system than that they’ll end up breaking the system. If there’s a strong enough public push to reclaim the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, politicians will arise to support it (you know folks like Gov. Palin and Gov. Jindal would, for instance) and the courts will be influenced by that–SCOTUS would at the very least, because Justices Roberts/Scalia/Thomas/Alito would support such a thing, and Justice Kennedy is too much a politician to oppose it if it had strong popular support. If a real movement coalesces here, I do think that things will get messy in one sense, but I think that messiness will stay largely within the bounds of the political/judicial system.
REALLY?
papalee Saturday, February 14th at 12:41PM EST (link)“but I think that messiness will stay largely within the bounds of the political/judicial system.” I am sure that Lord North and his friends were of the same mindset bacl in 1776. Somehow it just didn’t work out that way.
There is no way we can save either our freedom or have anything approaching national security if the current government is allowed to continue on its present path.
Key difference:
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 1:12PM EST (link)the American colonies weren’t within the bounds of the political judicial system, and thus could not operate within it; they were colonies. I completely agree that there needs to be a reassertion of federalism, but the current situation simply isn’t analogous to that of 1773.
If you believe
papalee Saturday, February 14th at 2:58PM EST (link)that any of the national politicians regard the states and state governments as anything more than colonies, please demonstrate from the history of the last fifty years how that has consistently worked out in legislation. Since Lincoln destroyed the original meaning of the Constitution and the relationship between the national government and the states, they frequently get less attention and respect than the large cities dominated by corrupt Democrat regimes.
The first part of any new American revolution will have to be the teaching of real history – impossible in leftist-liberal dominated colleges and universities – and waking up local and state politicians to their responsibilities. Unfortunately, they don’t even understand the language of freedom and the responsibility of liberty which is why the Ninth and Tenth Amendments have been dead, dead letters for so many years. I really wish this were not so, but for Democrats the law and the Constitution is only what they want to do right now which is why Eric Holder whose view of the Second indicates a lack of functional literacy can be confirmed as Attorney General.
Couple points
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 10:04PM EST (link)One, I don’t think it’s fair to say that “Lincoln destroyed the original meaning of the Constitution and the relationship between the national government and the states.” The Civil War as a whole did shift the balance of power toward the federal government–from a position which, I would argue, was tilted rather too much toward the states (at least in some respects)–but I think the Progressives did far more damage than Lincoln did.
Two, the states clearly aren’t treated as colonies–they’re treated as part of the country. State governments are moving toward becoming vestigial, I’ll grant; that’s what needs to change via a reassertion of the Tenth Amendment. That won’t be easy, and it will certainly be made harder by the historical ignorance of so many Americans, because there’s no question that the national Democratic Party will fight it–but I’d be willing to bet that you could get some of the state party organizations to support you; this is, I think, a cause the conservative movement needs to be on about.
As far as I am concerned, your answer simply confirmed my assertions.
papalee Saturday, February 14th at 10:26PM EST (link)Lincoln who acted as a dictator for the whole of his regime asserted that the states had no right to leave a union which they had entered freely and frequently be acts which stated their right to leave if things didn’t work out. True, he was not the originator of the ideas he put into practice but he, in fact was the change agent. Fair or not, that is the fact of the matter.
And why are “state governments moving toward becoming vestigial?” Is it not that the Federal Government pays absolutely not attention to either Nine Or Ten?
But otherwise, you are absolutely right and right on. I simply suspect that you have never been a government official, elected or otherwise.
You've bought the line on Lincoln
theancientmariner (Diary) Sunday, February 15th at 11:04PM EST (link)which is unfortunate.
As for the governments of our states, the key phrase is moving toward. They aren’t there yet by any means, and if they wake up and smell the oncoming pavement, they still have time to spread their wings and catch an updraft.
Lincoln Did Not Deny Their Right To Seceed...
rcov092 (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 1:03AM EST (link)he denied their right to seceed over the issue of slavery.
Now we are all slaves to a national government that is shedding any humility of limitation despite the formal declarations as to the limitations we all agreed to in the formation of the Union of States into the Republic. This is a different thing.
“Not One Red Dime for the NRSC or NRCC till they stop trying to elect liberals”
Join the RedState Strike Force
Teh Biggest Cause of the Arrogance of Government in DC ...
rcov092 (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 1:04AM EST (link)the 17th Amendment. Senators no longer represent the states.
“Not One Red Dime for the NRSC or NRCC till they stop trying to elect liberals”
Join the RedState Strike Force
That pesky 17th Ammendment...
DONTREADONME (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 1:19AM EST (link)made caucasing with your party above the interests solely of the state, IMHO. Again just my opinion.
I do not think it was originally meant to end like it has. All Good Intentions and all that… but the power of the parties with their campaign finance system and brand name has almost trumped all ability to run as solely a representative of the states interest. When the DNC or the RNC is not happy with your performance or votes you could yourself in an uphill battle for reelection. Again IMO.
Not just that
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:31AM EST (link)It was a necessary but not sufficient precondition. What did more to bring that about than anything, on my read, was the breaking of the power of the state parties in the late ’60s. Jon Shields (political scientist–used to be at CU-Colorado Springs, I think he’s at Claremont-McKenna now) has written about this a fair bit of late.
Actually, I disagree with that
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:29AM EST (link)given his statements that he would preserve the Union on whatever basis possible, with regard to slavery.
The momentum question...
Elizabeth (Diary) Friday, February 13th at 2:34PM EST (link)After noting that California’s version of this bill was passed in 1994, I was curious as to whether or not there’s any real momentum on this issue. Here’s what my research revealed:
Overall, some good news and some bad news, unsurprisingly. Maybe we need to set up a new “Sovereignty Watch” or “Federalism Watch” page, sort of like the old RedState SCOTUS page.
“‘You come of the Lord Adam and the Lady Eve,’ said Aslan. ‘And that is both honour enough to erect the head of the poorest beggar, and shame enough to bow the shoulders of the greatest emperor on earth. Be content.’” — C.S. Lewis’ “Prince Caspian”
Good idea
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 9:16AM EST (link)Anything that can be done to stir up public interest and support would be worth doing, I think. (And isn’t it hard to believe how bad Oklahoma’s website is?)
Of course, CA won't want theirs anymore
itrytobenice (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 2:07PM EST (link)As they have driven their state into the ditch, they will be desperate to give up all sovereignty if the Feds will only bail out their skinny little rears.
Proper grammar saves lives.
Let’s eat Grandma.
Let’s eat, Grandma.
Maybe and maybe
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 10:06PM EST (link)Maybe they’d at least want to push it to get all the federal mandates off their budget.
Seems to me it should be the states that are in relatively financially healthy versus
6eorge Jetson (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 1:26AM EST (link)states that have the hat out.
I’m not sure what Michigan is doing on that list.
That debate in MO was a doozy too.
Brian Simpson (Diary) Sunday, February 15th at 11:26PM EST (link)You had one of our fine legislators comparing FOCA to the Civil War. Only when he did it, he referred to the CW as the “war of northern aggression”. [Now, before GC gets mad] That term is seen as one that is only used by those who feel that the wrong side won the Civil War. By extension, those people are seen as racists.
Good times.
| My RedState archive |
Important principles may and must be inflexible. ~ Abraham Lincoln
Wow. (nt)
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:32AM EST (link)Here's another link to the State Sovereignty issue
1SGinTN (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 11:54AM EST (link)http://www.rlc.org/2009/02/05/state-sovereignty-movement-quietly-growing/
Tu Ne Cede Malis
-Virgil
Thanks much for the link
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 1:18PM EST (link)I think this quote is particularly apropos:
Contrary to the fantasies of some extremists, these sovereignty bills are not the first step towards secession or splitting up the union, nor are they an effort to block collection of the income tax, appealing though that might be. For the most part, they are not so much political statements of independence as they are expressions of fiscal authority directed specifically at the growing cost of unfunded mandates being placed upon the states by the federal government.
I also think the conclusion is spot-on:
Twenty states standing up to the federal government and demanding a return to constitutional principles is a great start, but it remains to be seen whether legislatures and governors are brave enough or angry enough to follow through.
As the Obama administration and the Democrat Congress push for more expansion of federal power and spending that may help provide the motivation needed for the sovereignty movement to take off.
I think the key is for conservatives to organize at the grassroots to push this, so that legislatures and governors will in fact be brave enough to follow through. (That’s why I like Elizabeth’s idea.)
To Enforce the 10th,
SunDogII Saturday, February 14th at 5:20PM EST (link)you must first repeal the 17th.
Why do you say?
theancientmariner (Diary) Saturday, February 14th at 10:08PM EST (link)I’m in favor of repealing the 17th, but I’m not sure how your argument follows.
If the States
SunDogII Sunday, February 15th at 6:40AM EST (link)have no voice in the National government, then there is no official(s) to enforce the 10th. At present, the senators do not represent the state, as envisioned in the constitution. So instead of being a check on the tendency of popularly elected legislatures to grab power for their voting blocks, they make the problem worse, since they are elected for longer terms.
I see the connection you're making.
theancientmariner (Diary) Sunday, February 15th at 11:05PM EST (link)I still don’t think the repeal of the 17th is necessary to enforce the 10th, but I see where it could very well help.
Obama has no rspect for the US Constitution, don't expect him to even acknowledge these bills.
olsmithie (Diary) Sunday, February 15th at 11:22PM EST (link)He is too busy dismantling the Constitution to regard any of these bills with more than a passing notice.
Buckle your seat belts, the ride back to sanity is going to be a bumpy one.
Regards
It's not about him, it's about the courts
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:34AM EST (link)The key is to push this issue fast enough that SCOTUS would still uphold the states’ challenge. (Kennedy would hem and haw, but in the end, I believe he’d come down on the side of the actual Constitution.)
Homer, this is great. It gives something I can sink my teeth in. Both of them
gekster (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 12:05AM EST (link)I will look into this, and see what I can do. It won’t break up the union. It will put a halt on Libridiot Obama.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Pronounced Li bri diot. Say it slow a few times.
gekster (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 12:07AM EST (link)It’ll work
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Campaign for Liberty
TampaBay (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 3:38PM EST (link)Ron Paul’s organization, is still functioning and is growing stronger every day. Now I know a lot of people here did not agree with Paul, especially on foreign policy, but he is the highest ranking government official who CLEARLY UNDERSTANDS THE ROLE OF THE CONSTITUTION in the federal government. I encourage everyone here to check the website www.campaignforliberty.com and consider joining, before things get much worse.
NOW is the time to organize, not because Obama is president but because the country is on a course from which it cannot be changed without massive action, first on the local level and then the state level. Washington cannot be fixed until the states stand up to it. I have recently signed up to be a precinct leader in me area for the organization. Please consider doing so in your area.
We must all unite under one banner, the NRA, Redstate, Free Republic, Libertarians, and Campaing for Liberty. We can still turn this country around. That may not be the case in a few years.
LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!
We all need to pull together on this, imho.
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:37AM EST (link)TampaBay has that one right. I think an organized conservative grassroots push for federalism — especially if we can get our governors, like Palin, Jindal, Barbour, Pawlenty, and Sanford, to actively push it as well — is probably the most important thing the conservative movement can be about, at least for the next 2-4 years.
The Lib's incrementalism may be about to fail.
UpLateAgain (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 8:07PM EST (link)The plan for the usurpation of the Constitution has been, and will continue to be (at least for the time being), incremental in nature. When one even uses the word “revolution” in discussing the current situation, two things immediately occur. One: a momentary understanding of the word to mean violent revolution flashes through the mind. Two: We instantly find the concept of violent revolution abhorrent, impractical, unneeded, and even ludicrous, and attribute any actual consideration of violent revolution to “fringe extremists”. In continuing this thought pattern, our meaning of revolution devolves into some form of social upheaval consistent-with and subordinate-to the rule of law.
The incrementalism being foisted upon us will blind most people to the fact that the government, and our society, are in the process of going through a complete metamorphosis into something very different from that imagined by the founders. It has been ongoing for some time. What has occurred in the past couple of years in the economy has just provided the stage for a rapid transformation of the economic sector.
Where the Democrats are screwing up, is that they are trying to use this opportunity to transform not only the economy (virtually all at once), but the nature and spirit of our society as well. They are determined to see the end of both Federalism and American exceptionalism.
I say “where the Democrats are screwing up” because there is every chance this Putsch will result in a full-scale depression. When that occurs, a lot of the incrementalism will be exposed, and the catastrophic nature of the Democrats’ power grab will be a slap in the public’s face. With large-scale suffering, the mental jump from initially associating revolution with violence to understanding it as social change occurring within the context of the rule of law will take ever longer to occur.
We got Watts, Detroit, and South Central under circumstances much easier to endure than might be the case in a modern full-scale depression. Imagine what those riots would have been like had the people who ultimately caused a regaining of sanity in the regions not been of a significant mind to do so…. If the local powers that be, for example, decided that enough was enough, and that they were not going to support any further Constitutional usurpation.
The true brilliance of the Constitution lies in the fact that it is written, cataloged, and can be referenced. And every holder of public office in this country swears an oath to protect and defend it.
Of course riots are riots, and revolution is something else. Riots will normally eventually burn out, even without intervention. Revolution, however, has purpose. But riots may become violent revolution if purpose is instilled at the proper moment. What would be different about such a revolution here should it ever come to that, is that it would ultimately be a revolution orchestrated by the seasoned, rather than the youthful.
My wife, 64 years old, made the comment to me today that for the first time in her life she is afraid for her country…. And she does not blame George W. Bush for that circumstance.
You never never never actually need a gun, until you need a gun, and then nothing else will do.
Awesome....right on...
speciallist (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 8:19PM EST (link)np
Well said.
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:40AM EST (link)IMHO, that’s the reason we need to try to launch a Velvet Revolution, to provide a productive channel for dissent.
The catastrophic nature of the Democrats’ power grab is a slap in the public’s face
izoneguy (Diary) Monday, February 16th at 8:40PM EST (link)I can’t wait to see what the democrats do when we have the million person conservative march into DC. It will be people of all colors and ethnic backgrounds. It will be shock & awe….
If enough people keep flooding into Washington on a regular basis that will really piss of the Congress. Let’s Roll!!!!
The point cannot be made often enough: Modern liberalism, as embodied in the Obama presidency, is the defender of the status quo. And the status quo is a road to economic ruin. Political forces cannot redistribute the wealth that the economic system does not produce.
That's the ticket, all right. (nt)
theancientmariner (Diary) Wednesday, February 18th at 10:45AM EST (link)