Posted on 07/06/2012 12:26:52 PM PDT by crz
Edited on 07/06/2012 12:38:31 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
PHOENIX -- Voters could get the right to overrule federal laws and mandates under the terms of an initiative filed late Thursday.
The Arizona Constitution already says the federal Constitution "is the supreme law of the land." This measure, if approved in November, it would add language saying that federal document may not be violated by any government -- including the federal government.
That should be AZdaileySun.
Good luck with that.
Let the revolution begin!
Thanks to the mod for the edit. I do not post much here.
Anyway, AZ does not seem to scared of the Obamanites.
Just wish more states would lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way! This state has taken the brunt end of the Obamanite agenda.
Once upon a time, we had a check on the fedgov. It was called the U.S. Senate.
The Senate was set up to protect the states from the rabble known to populate the house and WH. Senators were elected by the state congresses and ratified by the state’s governor.
The progressives pushed, shoved and lied and got the 17th amendment passed which essentially made the Senate nothing more than the house, on steroids and just more rabble.
Repeal the 17th amendment and watch the likes of Chucky Schmucky Chumer go the way of the dinosaur.
Oh please. Supremacy clause trumps. Unconstitutional on its face.
Please site the clause and explain to me exactly what makes this unconsitutional?
When the federal gov is rogue, whose job is it to right it? The federal gov? (Nope--it's rogue; it refuses to right it self). The States? One possibility. We the People? The other.
it would add language saying that federal document may not be violated by any government — including the federal government.
Since the Fed is already violating the Constitution what makes anyone think it will obey this?
Let’s say this actually passes. What then? Is it civil war? Do federal troops invade Arizona? No need.
The Treasury Department can just stop sending checks to Arizona. Then, it’s game over. Just imagine thousands of Arizona entitlement recipients marching on the state capitol with pitchforks and torches (and scooters and canes).
And there’s no state in the union where that tactic wouldn’t work to squash any “states rights” uprising. Just look at the way every last one of them bows to DC to keep from losing any federal highway funding.
Soon to be struck down by Roberts as unconstitutional.
Supremacy Clause?
I know the 10th amendment give states the ultimate say on any issue not specifically stated in the Constitution, is that what you are talking about?
I’m certainly not a constitutional scholar, so there may be plenty of reasons why I’m off base. However, from a layman’s perspective, it seems that a single state has little power over the federal government.
Let’s say the Arizona constitution is modified to basically say that Arizona will take it upon themselves to handle whatever duty the federal government is constitutionally required to do but refuses to do. Further, let’s say Arizona will take it upon themselves to adjudicate the immigration status of illegal aliens and deport any who are here illegally, effectively bypassing INS altogether.
The feds then sue Arizona in federal court and win the case with the result being a federal court order to “cease and desist”. Perhaps it goes on to the USSC and the Supremes side with the lower courts.
If Arizona says, well we’re going to do it anyway, so stop us if you can. Then what? We would probably be looking at federalizing of the state national guard (as was done by Eisenhower in the Little Rock case back in 1957), basically pitting the federal troops against whoever is left that would make up a “state militia”.
If it didn’t go that far, it could simply result in the federal government withholding any and all federal funds going to Arizona (eg highway funds, medicaid matching funds, education funding, food assistance to the needy, HUD funding, unemployment funding, etc, etc. Okay, even if the citizens of Arizona would put up with that and fund everything with no federal funds, their state income, sales and property taxes would likely go up significantly to make up at least part of the difference.
Bottom line is that it seems that the federal government has a lot of arrows in their quiver should it come down to a showdown between them and a single state.
And this from a state who keeps sending McCain to represent them in the Senate. Wow. Something doesn’t compute here.
The first state constitutions after independence were wildly democratic. In short time they learned the value of mixed government, i.e. a split legislature in which each was derived from different sources like the British Parliament. The MD Senate was the first to use an electoral system to filter the wishes of the people; it became the model for our Presidential elections.
What our Founding generation learned in a few years has been ignored in nearly a hundred by our political cognoscenti.
True enough. The feds can pull all funding from AZ to put the squeeze on the state. But, do you know how many people visit that Grand National park in AZ a year? Do you understand the excess revenue from those parks would go toward the State treasury for entitlements.
That is only one form of revenue the State could use. Tolls from roads running through the state from California and New Mexico would be the other. There are how many toll roads on the interstate system in the USA now?
AZ is the home to the best attack helicopter in the world. Maybe the feds might decide to not purchase that from AZ? OK,then that company sells to other countries.
In short, your take on it although somewhat correct, would in fact, be very temporary, after a year..maybe two, and if the state institutes a sales tax and not a direct income tax, and a stable currency, how long do you think it would take for corporations to get the hell out of some of the the rest of the country and into AZ? Especially when it would have NO CORPORATE INCOME TAX? California would hear that giant sucking sound going east.
Which federal troops would fire upon those fellow citizens? Especially under this present administration? You want to see a rebellion of unbelievable magnitude? You would see it if that were to happen. The whole country would explode...Texas, for one example.
Finally, you are correct, those welfare cases would have to get out. I hope they wont let the door hit them in the ass on the way out. Those who want to work will find work after a short time.
Heh Heh..
These people seem to forget who the hell formed this failure of a federal system. It sure was not a national assembly! Oh they forget..there was not any such national assembly..it was the STATES, AND THERE WAS NOT ANY CONSTITUTION FOR some years before this guberment was formed.
There was just articles forming a loose confederation which may or may not have included Canada.
They can take their supremacy clause and stuff the SOB right where the sun doesnt shine.
With the national propaganda machine controlled by the federal government, the ability of a state like Arizona to get its message out to those who understand how a federal system is supposed to work, is extremely limited. Because the critical resources (internet, banking system, military, justice system, border patrol, etc) are in the hands off the feds, Arizona will be at a great disadvantage in any kind of stand-off. Needless to say I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama turn a blind eye to any incursions from another Arizona antagonist - the Mexican army.
I am very sympathetic to Arizona but got to face reality.
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.