First in the Nation: Idaho House Passes Health Care Nullification

In an historic vote in the Idaho House of Representatives, the Federal Health Care Nullification Act (originally authored by the Tenth Amendment Center) passed by a vote of 49-20.

"The state of Idaho hereby exercises its sovereign power to declare the public policy of the state of Idaho regarding the right of all persons residing in the state of Idaho in choosing the mode of securing health care services free from the imposition of penalties, or the threat thereof, by the federal government of the United States of America relating thereto"

The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

Implied in any nullification legislation is enforcement of the state law. In the Virginia Resolution of 1798, James Madison wrote of the principle of interposition:

"That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them."

No argument is being made by me that the ultimate authority on what our government can do rests with the People. However, it has been provided with constitutional means to have that influence exercised. Originally our government was established so that the state legislatures were actually represented in the Senate. However, the People were convinced that this was not democratic enough, amended the Constitution and now our Senators are elected like Reps. This was a big mistake.

I agree that it was a big mistake. I also believe that there is more to it than what the naked eye can detect. It is a "conditioning effect" if you will. Kinda like flash cards, they slowly convince the mass that tyranny is good. Then before you know it, BOOM.. Obama.

Even the greatest advocates of Enumerated powers do not dispute that there are certain unenumerated powers associated with the sheer sovereignty of the nation. Hamilton’s magnificent Essay on the Constitutionality of the National Bank most clearly expostulates this concept.

There were certainly several Senators recalled by their State over the "National Bank". I do not share Mr. Hamilton's view on our system of Government. If I had to classify myself, it would be Jeffersonian in nature.

The federal constitution is the creature of the People not the states. It was deliberately set up to be voted on by the People in convention in the states rather than state legislatures exactly so that it could not be truthfully claimed to be the “creature of the states”. If a state legislature were allowed to ratify then it could at a later date vote to de-ratify.

Your comment above is where you and I completely differ. The Federal Constitution was created by the States, for their benefit, to be mutually beneficial to all States and the people thereof. That is why we have a Federal Government, not a National Government. I understand terminologies change over time, but historical fact is just that. As Madison said," the undisputed fact is, that the Constitution was made by the people, but as embodied into the several States, who were parties to it; and therefore made by the States in their highest authoritative capacity."

It is also a historical fact that Madison said a great many things. Please continue reading..

Back when Madison was more Hamiltonian than Hamilton he even proposed that the states be abolished and made into administrative units created by the general government. He also wrote to H during the NY ratification convention that once ratifying the states could not withdraw. Nor could they ratify “conditionally”.

If this above is true, they sure didn't make this aware to the State of New York. I also believe that New York ratified before that letter saw the light of day. Furthermore, they did ratify the Constitution “conditionally”.

Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York; July 26, 1788.

WE the Delegates of the People of the State of New York, duly elected and Met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia in the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, Do declare and make known. ...

That the Powers of Government may be reassumed by the People, whensoever it shall become necessary to their Happiness; ...

In regards to Mr. Madison, here is what he said during Virginia's ratification:

That resolution declares that the powers granted by the proposed Constitution are the gift of the people, and may be resumed by them when perverted to their oppression, and every power not granted thereby remains with the people, and at their will. It adds, likewise, that no right, of any denomination, can be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by the general government, or any of its officers, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for these purposes. There cannot be a more positive and unequivocal declaration of the principle of the adoption — that every thing not granted is reserved. This is obviously and self-evidently the case, without the declaration.

Here is that resolution:

We the Delegates of the people of Virginia . . . declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will: that therefore no right of any denomination, can be cancelled, abridged, restrained or modified, by the Congress, by the Senate or House of Representatives acting in any capacity, by the President or any department or officer of the United States, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes. . .

The citizens of each state were/are the ultimate sovereign in deciding whether or not their state would join, or remain with the Union. It is true about the letter you mentioned in regards to Madison and Hamilton. They I believe were willing to sell their own mother in trying to get the Constitution ratified. Here Madison in his letter to Nicholas P. Trist, dated February 15, 1830. In it he said something completely different than the letter you've mentioned:

Applying a like view of the subject to the case of the U. S. it results, that the compact being among individuals as embodied into States, no State can at pleasure release itself therefrom, and set up for itself. The compact can only be dissolved by the consent of the other parties, or by usurpations or abuses of power justly having that effect."

After all, it was Madison who said that the states had the right to decide when the federal government was abusing its powers. In such cases the states could interpose their authority in order to protect their citizens. During the same year as the Trist letter, Mr. Madison also wrote to Robert Hayne. In that letter he stated: "extreme cases of oppression" a state would be “absolved . . . from the Constitutional Compact to which it is a party"..

I'll wait your response

1 No Senators were recalled over the National Bank. Senators cannot be recalled.

2 Jefferson tried to undermine the Constitution at every issue unless supporting it would directly benefit his political machine. He is the last place any constitutional scholar goes for an understanding of it. Hamilton is the FIRST place one should go having written 2/3s of the greatest political philosophy since Aristotle explaining it, The Federalist Papers.

3 Had the Constitution been created by the States it would been sufficient to have the State legislatures ratify it. This was EXPLICITLY prevented by having conventions elected by the People to do it. They merely GATHERED in states as ONE People, Americans, to establish this highest authority.
Once the Conventions were elected the States had NOTHING to do with the process.

A Constitution is a FUNDAMENTAL law incapable of change by a single state or any number outside that prescribes in the Constitution for amendment.

4 You confuse “Conditional” ratification with the ability of the People to recreate a government which is what is referred to within your quotes from NY and Va. States had no ability to retract a ratification they were out of the picture entirely. The People could at anytime demand their representatives call a Constitutional Convention or purpose amendments. And amendments were rapidly added after ratification.

5 Madison’s letter convinced Hamilton that he could not allow conditional ratification and came at a critical point when he was almost worn down from his Herculean effort at the convention. It led to his amazing victory in NY converting a two-thirds defeat to a win through sheer strength of will and overpowering intellectual ability. And conditional ratification was, in fact, EXPLICITLY rejected by the delegates.

6 We have never seen any “oppression” which would or should dissolve the Union. Disagreements have been eventually resolved within our constitution even though traitorous Democrats attacked it and the Union a few years back. This Quixotic and utterly boneheaded attempt by the Slave Power deserves nothing but contempt and was fortunately crushed by the power of the Union. Unfortunately, it inflicted ruin on the rest of the South along its clownish Ruling Class.

7 Madison said that the government was both federal and national. Congress was federal but the executive and judicial were national. The “highest authoritative capacity” of the states to which Madison referred is subordinate to that of the federal and the People.

8 Are you seriously claiming that in 1941 a state could have said “we nullify the Draft Act” and refuse to send men to fight the Japs and Nazis?

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.