Posted on 02/24/2009 9:47:52 PM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion
Reasserting Sovereignty in South Dakota
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2197780/posts
SC lawmakers advance states rights measure
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2198612/posts
COLUMBIA — South Carolina lawmakers have advanced a measure asserting state sovereignty, saying they want to send President Obama and Congress a message.
HR 875 The food police
campaign for liberty ^
Posted on Monday, March 09, 2009 9:32:17 AM by modhom
HR 875 The food police, criminalizing organic farming and the backyard gardener, and violation of the 10th amendment
This bill is sitting in committee and I am not sure when it is going to hit the floor. One thing I do know is that very few of the Representatives have read it. As usual they will vote on this based on what someone else is saying. Urge your members to read the legislation and ask for opposition to this devastating legislation. Devastating for everyday folks but great for factory farming ops like Monsanto, ADM, Sodexo and Tyson to name a few.
I have no doubt that this legislation was heavily influenced by lobbyists from huge food producers. This legislation is so broad based that technically someone with a little backyard garden could get fined and have their property siezed. It will effect anyone who produces food even if they do not sell but only consume it. It will literally put all independent farmers and food producers out of business due to the huge amounts of money it will take to conform to factory farming methods. If people choose to farm without industry standards such as chemical pesticides and fertilizers they will be subject to a vareity of harassment from this completely new agency that has never before existed. That's right, a whole new government agency is being created just to police food, for our own protection of course.
Posted on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:44:27 PM by AmericaIsScrewed08
Efforts in more than half of the state legislatures to assert state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution and prevent unwanted impositions by the federal government are now running into serious partisan opposition. Most of these bills have been introduced and are supported by Republican legislators and Democrats are doing everything they can to block them and make sure that their states comply with federal mandates issued by a national Congress dominated by their party.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogcritics.org ...
Posted on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:18:55 PM by ForGod'sSake
Saying the federal government has taken too much control over Kansas affairs, some key state senators and a minor political party are supporting a resolution to affirm the state's sovereignty.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1609 by Sen. Mary Pilcher Cook, R-Shawnee, calls on the federal government to "cease and desist" from withholding federal funds or otherwise penalizing states that don't comply with federal mandates.
The resolution cites the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reserves to the states powers that aren't specifically granted to the federal government.
Pilcher Cook said she was not yet ready to discuss the resolution with the media.
But the Kansas Libertarian Party issued a statement of support for the resolution on Sunday.
Party Treasurer Patrick Wilbur said the state's Libertarians decided to back Pilcher Cook's effort after she presented it to their northern Kansas committee, which meets in Topeka.
Wilbur said it's directed at federal mandates such as the "No Child Left Behind" education law and the recently approved economic stimulus act.
The education law ordered states to adopt new standards for student achievement but never provided the money to meet the goals.
And as for the stimulus plan, "money coming in from the stimulus is going to have all kinds of strings attached," Wilbur said.
Amendment X: 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.
Hypocrisy and politicians! There is nothing new in this love-match made by Cupid’s arrow of self-interest, right? Wrong, in the current flurry of state legislatures passing or considering resolutions asserting state sovereignty, many politicians are doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.
With close to 30 states having approved or currently considering resolutions of sovereignty, it is noteworthy how many Republicans are now standing up to be counted as defenders of the Constitution, especially after their silence during the Bush administration’s eight-year-assault on the Bill of Rights. And what of the Democrats who were formerly vehement critics of Bush’s actions? They have suddenly gone silent as the Obama administration continues many of Bush’s policies they once opposed. Hypocrisy and partisan politics, of course, but above this is a more fundamental issue involving the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.
After the Constitution was ratified by state conventions, the constitutional debate continued with the submission of a Bill of Rights. Alexander Hamilton argued against such a bill, asserting that the people had not surrendered their rights in ratifying the Constitution, so such protections were unnecessary. “Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing, and as they retain everything, they have no need of particular reservations.” Furthermore, Hamilton feared that protecting specific rights might imply that any unmentioned rights would not be protected.
Opposed to Hamilton’s argument, Thomas Jefferson, at the time serving as ambassador to France, supported such a bill. He wrote to James Madison, the author of the Constitution: “Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can.”
Madison was, like Hamilton, concerned that enumerating such rights could “enlarge the powers delegated by the Constitution”. Consequently, he submitted the following draft of the Ninth Amendment to the Congress: “The exceptions here or elsewhere in the Constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the Constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.”
Madison further elaborated on these rights in his speech introducing the Bill of Rights: “It has been said, by way of objection to a Bill of Rights. … that in the Federal Government they are unnecessary, because the power enumerated, and it follows, that all that are not granted by the Constitution are retained; that the Constitution is a bill of powers, the great residuum being the rights of the people; and, therefore, a Bill of Rights cannot be so necessary as if the residuum was thrown into the hands of the Government. I admit that these arguments are not entirely without foundation, but they are not as conclusive to the extent it has been proposed. It is true the powers of the general government are circumscribed; they are directed to particular objects; but even if government keeps within those limits, it has certain discretionary powers with respect to the means, which may admit of abuse.”
Today, after the Bush administration’s restrictions of constitutional rights through the Patriot Act, the John Warner Defense Act of 2007, the Military Commissions Act, and Presidential Decision Directive 51, with Republican and Democratic congressional acquiescence, the rights debate has devolved to the States. Consequently, the Tenth Amendment has moved to centre stage.
Ratified on December 15, 1791, the Tenth Amendment reserves all powers not granted to the national government to the States or the people. Based on an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation where “each state retains its sovereignty”, it restates the Constitution’s principle of federalism, and in supporting States Rights, it makes explicit the idea that the federal government is limited to those powers granted in the Constitution.
Previously, States Rights was used to justify two indelible moral stains on the national character: slavery and segregation. However, today the issues include 2nd Amendment gun rights, unfunded mandates and demands from Washington, DC on how to spend stimulus money, national identification cards, and a presidential declaration of martial law, among others.
While most of the Founding Fathers believed the Constitution did not grant the national government any power that it did not expressly mention, most American political leaders since the Civil War have opined that the Constitution grants the national government the authority to do more or less anything that is not expressly prohibited by the first eight amendments. And with the contemporary submission of Congress to the Executive, the debate is now between the States and the Executive.
The present debate is constitutionally necessary and long overdue. As the debate unfolds, hopefully not into a full-blown constitutional crisis - the last one resulted in the Civil War - partisan politics and party loyalties will undoubtedly be the surface politics on the television screen and talk radio. Will the public realise that the Constitution is not what George W. Bush called “just a goddamned piece of paper”? Since the Republican and Democratic Congresses have been missing in action, it’s time for the States to reclaim Jefferson’s “half a loaf”.
© The National Forum and contributors 1999-2009. All rights reserved.
Posted on Saturday, March 14, 2009 12:18:47 AM by ForGod'sSake
Sam Rohrer senses average Americans have grave concerns about rapid and aggressive changes coming from the federal government.
The state representative from Berks County said that, as a result of that concern, a growing number of his constituents are calling on legislators to re-examine the relationship between the state and federal governments.
Rohrer has joined politicians from nearly half of the states in the union to introduce resolutions in their various state houses reaffirming state legislatures' right to invoke the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, giving them powers not delegated to the federal government.
The resolutions would merely reaffirm what has been in the U.S. Constitution for more than 200 years. But it's a detail many people might not know, and in times like these, it is an aspect of the Constitution that Rohrer and others think is worth reinforcing.
"(Citizens) do not like what's happening and coming out of Washington, and they don't believe that what's being done is anything more than throwing fuel on the fire," Rohrer said.
Posted on Sunday, March 15, 2009 12:26:42 AM by ForGod'sSake
You may have noticed I am a big fan of rugged individualism, self-reliance, individual freedoms, liberty, self-determination and defiance — heavy on the defiance.
These uniquely American characteristics course through our veins and pulse in our genes, gifts from our amazing, defiant forefathers.
They sailed across an unknown ocean, to an unknown land, to establish a country free of kings and tyrants.
In securing our freedom, they wrote a constitution that limited the power of the federal government.
FGS you are awesome!
Prayer and organic food saved my life last year. In April I was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, which had already destroyed my kidneys. By December, I was in remission after thousands of prayers, a raw vegetarian diet, and mild chemotherapy(designed to block the effect of the malformed protein the mm cells were busily making). What killed the 16B cancer cells?
We are in a world of trouble.
God can and DOES perform miracles, eh?
We are in a world of trouble.
Indeed we are. We could ALL use a miracle right about now, but His will WILL be done. How He deals with America will be something to behold I suspect. Only He can design the perfect outcome, whatever it may be. May He have mercy on us; Amen.
Idaho House to feds: back off a bit
KIVI TV ^ | March 23, 2009 | crAPweasels
Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 6:24:12 PM by ForGod'sSake
BOISE, Idaho (AP) - The Idaho House has voted 51-17 to tell the federal government to respect the state's sovereign rights.
Rep. Dick Harwood, a St. Maries Republican, told the House Monday that the federal government is overstepping its role and Idaho's sovereignty with mandated programs like No Child Left Behind, the education reform legislation promoted by former President Bush.
State sovereignty is outlined in the U.S. Constitution's 10th Amendment, which says powers not granted to the federal government are reserved for the states.
Harwood says the country is not designed to be under the direction of 1 overarching government.
Coeur d'Alene Rep. George Sayler, a Democrat, says the memorial is just an effort to continue a 200-year-old sovereignty battle over power.
Oklahoma Senate Passes Bill Affirming State Sovereignty..
John Birch Society; JBS ^ | March 4, 2009 | Larry Greenley
Posted on Thursday, March 05, 2009 10:56:00 PM by JSDude1
Oklahoma is still leading the rest of the states in affirming state sovereignty over those powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution as secured by the Tenth Amendment. On February 18 the Oklahoma House passed HJR1003, a bill affirming Oklahoma's Tenth Amendment sovereignty powers, by a vote of 83 to 13. Today the Oklahoma Senate passed its version of the bill, SJR10, by a vote of 25 to 17.
At least 15 other states have already introduced resolutions similar to Oklahoma's
Thanks FGS.
Have you seen this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2213563/posts
U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms
I caught a blurb on FoxNews earlier. Still can’t get over the audicity of Obomber and his minions. Simply unbelievable! My big concern is even IF conservatives are in a position to reclaim majorities in 2010, will it be too late? The Dims are moving at light speed for a reason and it doesn’t bode well for the future of the Republic I’m afraid.
Townhall.com ^ | March 25, 2009 | Walter Williams
Posted on Tue Mar 24 2009 22:48:44 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) by ForGod'sSake
Our Colonial ancestors petitioned and pleaded with King George III to get his boot off their necks. He ignored their pleas, and in 1776, they rightfully declared unilateral independence and went to war. Today it's the same story except Congress is the one usurping the rights of the people and the states, making King George's actions look mild in comparison. Our constitutional ignorance -- perhaps contempt, coupled with the fact that we've become a nation of wimps, sissies and supplicants -- has made us easy prey for Washington's tyrannical forces. But that might be changing a bit. There are rumblings of a long overdue re-emergence of Americans' characteristic spirit of rebellion.
Just because I could...
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.