Posted on 02/05/2009 3:37:02 AM PST by Evil Slayer
Lawmakers in New Hampshire are telling the federal government to back off because plans for a federal handgun license, "hate crimes" laws to regulate Christians' speech about their own religious beliefs on homosexuality, President Obama's youth corps for mandatory public service and the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" to "balance" talk radio are none of them constitutional.
Such plans by the bureaucrats and administrators in Washington, D.C., are "altogether void" and if mandated, "shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States," the lawmakers are warning.
The terse alarm is contained in House Concurrent Resolution 6, which has been introduced for debate. It affirms states' rights "based on Jeffersonian principles."
It's not the first such move in the United States. WND reported last year when state representatives in Oklahoma, steamed over a perceived increase in federal usurping of states' rights, approved Joint House Resolution 1089 on a 92-3 vote to reassert the state's sovereignty under the 10th Amendment and serve "notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
New speech, press, gun or ammunition limits 'altogether void'
The problem is money.
Most States are bankrupt and in need of Federal Dollars. The only way to get Federal Dollars is to join the Socialist parade coming out of Washington DC.
I was thinking New Hampshire had abandoned their “Live Free or Die” principles - glad to see I may be wrong.
I wish the people of South Carolina, Texas and other right-thinking states would encourage their legistalures to follow suit.
Same here in Alaska, we have fortunately not gone deep in debt and we do not need any of the porkcadone from DC.
bttt
...and so it begins. Most states could govern themselves just fine on the current federal tax base they derive from their citizens...and with much more targeted local control.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
So, uh, why did New Hampshire vote for Obama? Couldn’t they see this coming?
“But, father dear, won't there come a day,
When the Rich run out of cash,
And there will be all H*ll to pay,
and things will go to smash?
Get out of here, no son of mine,
You stinking little brat,
You do too much thinking,
To be a Democrat! (anon.)
barbra ann
I totally agree. The Feds have way too much power.
The mouse that roared. A minnow cannot tell Gargantua what to eat or not to eat.
I dont think much of New Hampshire after their early primary gave us McCain.
New Hampshire can KMA.
IMO, it is time for the States to secede from the Union. The question is whether or not we are ready for another civil war and are the states and it’s people up to it.
>>The problem is money.
Most States are bankrupt and in need of Federal Dollars. The only way to get Federal Dollars is to join the Socialist parade coming out of Washington DC.<<
If the states are in such dire needs, here’s the answer:
1. Reduce spending.
2. Stop collecting taxes for Washington.
3. Encourage businesses.
Otherwise, BOHICA - and it will get worse.
>>The problem is money.
Most States are bankrupt and in need of Federal Dollars. The only way to get Federal Dollars is to join the Socialist parade coming out of Washington DC.<<
If the states are in such dire needs, here’s the answer:
1. Reduce spending.
2. Stop collecting taxes for Washington.
3. Encourage businesses.
Otherwise, BOHICA - and it will get worse.
re: The Feds have way too much power.
Sad but true. Even sadder is the fact that we gave it to them willingly, even anxiously in some cases.
Like most good things gone awry, it started out as a good deal for the States. But like most apparently good things that go bad, the good start was just the hook. The money coming from the feds was great, and at first the strings attached to the funds were very reasonable.
Jump ahead 60 years or so and the pitfalls associated with ‘found’ money from the feds become readily apparent.
My guess would be that about 90 percent of the objectionable power the feds yield over the States is directly linked to the money transferred BACK to the States.
Let’s start a movement. Let’s call it the United STATES of America. It’s a catchy title for a philospohy of government.
bump
People don’t go into a fighting war, risking life and limb, when there’s still a chicken in every pot, the bills are paid and they have a feeling of security.
I still don’t think we’re even close. The gov’t can get away with a LOT as long as folks are fed. However, if the current economic situation continues to worsen AND the current administration gets really heavy-handed AND there is a general belief that the election process is rigged then the general population may start feeling that they don’t have much to loose and no other way out but to fight. I don’t see that happening for many, many years yet - if at all.
Until then, people will mumble and gripe, but not really DO anything in response to the loss of liberty. Apparently, loss of freedom alone is not enough to fight for.
A huge part of states’ expenditures are welfare state programs, often enacted for the sole purpose of receiving federal money, or due to a federal mandate. These welfare state programs soak up an unbelievable amount of money simply for administrative purposes, while very little of the earmarked cash goes towards the intended beneficiaries (the poor, the mentally ill, etc.).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.