8 states just motioned to declare sovereignty

[paul250]

In case you didn't hear about it on the mainstream media
(which you haven't because they want to keep us asleep), numerous states are currently declaring sovereignty, including:

Washington:
HJM 4009 - 2009-10

New Hampshire:
HCR 0006

Arizona:
http://www.azleg.gov/Formatdocumenta...s/hcr2024p.htm

Montana:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm

Michigan
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(21r...-01-22-002.pdf


Missouri:
Missouri House of Representatives.HTM

Oklahoma:
State legislator Charles Key Tenth Amendment Resolution « AxXiom for Liberty

Hawaii:
HAWAII - INDEPENDENT & SOVEREIGN

Thought you guys in the US might want to see these, i thought it would make huge news!

[gravmy0]

I don't quite understand...

What degree of independence are these States trying to achieve?

[geochem1st]

The Tenth Amendment, which makes explicit the idea that the federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution is generally recognized to be a truism. In United States v. Sprague (1931) the Supreme Court noted that the amendment "added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified."

From time to time states and local governments have attempted to assert exemption from various federal regulations, especially in the areas of labor and environmental controls, using the Tenth Amendment as a basis for their claim. An often-repeated quote, from United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941), reads as follows:

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.

[gibiphone]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

In United States v. Sprague (1931) the Supreme Court noted that the amendment "added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified."

From time to time states and local governments have attempted to assert exemption from various federal regulations, especially in the areas of labor and environmental controls, using the Tenth Amendment as a basis for their claim. An often-repeated quote, from United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941), reads as follows:

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.

The poor 10th, the most abused and trampled upon amendment to the Constitution.

The Tenth Amendment, which makes explicit the idea that the federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution. . .

When did this ever stop the Federal Government in its boundless growth? For example, how could the Federal Government Constitutionally justify the 18th Amendment which banned the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol?

[The_Sentry]

Originally Posted by paul250

In case you didn't hear about it on the mainstream media
(which you haven't because they want to keep us asleep), numerous states are currently declaring sovereignty, including:

Washington:
HJM 4009 - 2009-10

New Hampshire:
HCR 0006

Arizona:
http://www.azleg.gov/Formatdocumenta...s/hcr2024p.htm

Montana:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm

Michigan
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(21r...-01-22-002.pdf


Missouri:
Missouri House of Representatives.HTM

Oklahoma:
State legislator Charles Key Tenth Amendment Resolution « AxXiom for Liberty

Hawaii:
HAWAII - INDEPENDENT & SOVEREIGN

Thought you guys in the US might want to see these, i thought it would make huge news!

Wow.....let's see if they're willing to follow up on that.

If they're serious, then they'd make serious efforts to get rid of all federally run organizations in those states....including the closure of the military bases.

If they go that far...I'll believe their convictions towards seceeding.

[zplapplap]

Originally Posted by gibiphone

For example, how could the Federal Government Constitutionally justify the 18th Amendment which banned the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol?

The 18th amendment was ratified by the states. The Constutition has an amendment process and the conditions were met. No justification needed.

[zplapplap]

Originally Posted by paul250

Thought you guys in the US might want to see these, i thought it would make huge news!

Bills are introduced to this effect during most legislative sessions. Do they ever come to a vote? Do they ever pass? What would it mean if these sort of resolutions were passed?

The title of this thread is misleading and inaccurate. As it is written, it doesn't make sense. How exactly does a state "motion"? Kooks repeatedly introducing symbolic bills in state legislatures is not news.

[gibiphone]

Originally Posted by zplapplap

The 18th amendment was ratified by the states. The Constutition has an amendment process and the conditions were met. No justification needed.

You are correct, this was not the best example I could have come up with off the top of my head.

Of course it was ratified by 3/4 of the states as all amendments to the Constitution must be, after it was presented to the states by the House of Representatives and the Senate.

But to keep on a similar subject, an example of the trampling of the 10th Amendment would be the federally mandated drinking age of 21. Since when is that Federal rather than State, or even county business?

[zplapplap]

Originally Posted by gibiphone

But to keep on a similar subject, an example of the trampling of the 10th Amendment would be the federally mandated drinking age of 21. Since when is that Federal rather than State, or even county business?

This is a good example of bullying by Congress. Of course, Congress didn't act beyond their mandated powers here either. They simply used the power of the purse to deny federal highway funds to states that refused to change the drinking age to 21. The drinking age issue remains in control of the state legislatures. Any state could revert back to 18... if they can afford it

I agree with the larger point you are making regarding the federal government (though I am not a states-rights guy when it comes to civil liberties). I think the best examples of your point about the trampling of the 10th amendment generally involve the Interstate Commerce Clause as a means of intrusion.

[gibiphone]

Originally Posted by zplapplap

This is a good example of bullying by Congress. Of course, Congress didn't act beyond their mandated powers here either. They simply used the power of the purse to deny federal highway funds to states that refused to change the drinking age to 21. The drinking age issue remains in control of the state legislatures. Any state could revert back to 18... if they can afford it

I agree with the larger point you are making regarding the federal government (though I am not a states-rights guy when it comes to civil liberties). I think the best examples of your point about the trampling of the 10th amendment generally involve the Interstate Commerce Clause as a means of intrusion.

Yep, when your charter is pretty much customs, immigration, national defense, foreign alliances/treaties, posts, interstate commerce oversight etc, etc, you really use that interstate commerce clause to ride roughshod over the individual states. The badgering by Congress in areas, without its jurisdiction (21 year old drinking, 55 MPH speed limit, motorcycle helmet law etc), using the purse strings as a prod particularly as it applied to federal highway funds, is far beyond the scope of power outlined in the Constitution for the Federal Government. The big 10th again. In the case of federally mandated motorcycle helmet laws, good for the populace in forcing the elected reps to rethink and overcome the DOT desired Federal dictate, despite the threat by the Feds to withhold highway funds.

The whole Interstate Commerce Clause has been misused so often that its once mighty redwood stature should now have been reduced to a toothpick, eh?

But if I were to be so loose and free with my compliance with Federal Tax laws. . .jail time!!!

[twinrider1]

Paul250,
Did you read the bills at the links provided?

[geochem1st]

Saw this bumper sticker this morning on the way to work. Plunked on the bumper of a beat up old Ford pickup truck:

Big Red and White Confederate Flag, next to it "Don't Blame Me I Voted For Jeff Davis"


got to love my new home state.

[bfcg]

Town and counties are always trying to secede. It happens all the time but rarely happens. Killington vermont has been trying to become part of New Hampshire and a little town near me is trying to break away from the county.

[paul250]

i only posted this as i thought it was interesting news, and yes i did read the links before i posted it, i have no opinion on it just thought it was interesting!

[bfcg]

Originally Posted by paul250

i only posted this as i thought it was interesting news, and yes i did read the links before i posted it, i have no opinion on it just thought it was interesting!

Yes I agree. I was not trying to belittle. I find it very interesting and it is an effective tactic that these local goverments use to put a spotlight on issues that usuall go unnoticed by the national media. It is all mostly symbolic as a way to protest unmet needs of that particular municipality or state.

[bfcg]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

Saw this bumper sticker this morning on the way to work. Plunked on the bumper of a beat up old Ford pickup truck:

Big Red and White Confederate Flag, next to it "Don't Blame Me I Voted For Jeff Davis"


got to love my new home state.

Yes
Already with the don't blame me stickers. narrow mindedness is what got this country in trouble.

[twinrider1]

Claiming sovereignty does not mean they are seceding from the Union. That is not their intent.

[IndianScout]

I already live in a sovereign land inside the US,

[The baron of norsworthy]

Guys

I read link but does anyone know what the states can do to inforce it??

However I live in the UK but I see know concrete argument in the text!!

[redcoats1976]

i think thats wonderful.let the car companies give their loans back to the federal government and get it from the Sovereign State of Michigan...

[River]

Originally Posted by redcoats1976

i think thats wonderful.let the car companies give their loans back to the federal government and get it from the Sovereign State of Michigan...

Made my day.

[crazymike]

Originally Posted by redcoats1976

i think thats wonderful.let the car companies give their loans back to the federal government and get it from the Sovereign State of Michigan...

If the govt. didn't have their noses up the US auto industries a$$ (and others) all the time TRYING to put them out of buisness, they wouldn't need the money in the first place.

[zplapplap]

Originally Posted by crazymike

If the govt. didn't have their noses up the US auto industries a$$ (and others) all the time TRYING to put them out of buisness, they wouldn't need the money in the first place.

The auto industry did it to themselves.

[LongBeach]

Well, from the get-go on this bail-out plan, I never was to thrilled with the
thought of the gov. having their sticky little finger's in these companies.
Banks, auto manufacturer's, etc.

[zplapplap]

Originally Posted by LongBeach

Well, from the get-go on this bail-out plan, I never was to thrilled with the
thought of the gov. having their sticky little finger's in these companies.
Banks, auto manufacturer's, etc.

My view on this is a bit different, though I understand the concern. The government is spending taxpayer money and investing in these companies. Once the first dollar is transfered, the government has a vested interest in their success and ultimately repaying the tax payer money should these businesses successfully emerge from this crisis. These corporations are not being forced, they can simply opt out of the capital investment. If these were your basic micro-loans or a contract that can be enforced in civil court, then I would say, "fine. Hands off." But, at least as it relates to the auto industry, these are billions of dollars going to a select few corporations. From that standpoint, this is an exceptional situation that, in my opinion, calls for increased governance (not direct control, just short-term oversight as it relates to the the loans).

Basically, I think Congress has a responsibility, especially in regards to the auto industry, of ensuring to the best of their ability that good dollars are not chasing bad.

[Mr Insane]

I don't like big government, the founding fathers believed government as a necessary evil.

[dress rehearsal]

+1000

[River]

Originally Posted by Mr Insane

I don't like big government, the founding fathers believed government as a necessary evil.

The Founding Fathers' distaste for big government was initially overwhelmed by, of all things, the Barbary pirates. At first we only had a Coast Guard, in keeping with their ideals. A Navy became necessary because of the pirates, and having a Navy required a strong central government financing the effort with federal taxes. The states could not handle the problem on their own.

I'm not saying I like the way things have turned out, just saying that the genie has been out of the bottle for a very long time, and not likely to be stuffed back in.

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by LongBeach

Well, from the get-go on this bail-out plan, I never was to thrilled with the
thought of the gov. having their sticky little finger's in these companies.
Banks, auto manufacturer's, etc.

But what of the banks, auto makers, and every other large corporation having their sticky little fingers all in the Government? To be honest it pisses me off just as much if not more. This is really why we are in the economic mess we are in.

[frankthomson]

Originally Posted by paul250

In case you didn't hear about it on the mainstream media
(which you haven't because they want to keep us asleep), numerous states are currently declaring sovereignty, including:
Washington:
HJM 4009 - 2009-10
New Hampshire:
HCR 0006
Arizona:
http://www.azleg.gov/Formatdocumenta...s/hcr2024p.htm
Montana:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htmMichigan
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(21r...-01-22-002.pdf
Missouri:
Missouri House of Representatives.HTM
Oklahoma:State legislator Charles Key Tenth Amendment Resolution « AxXiom for Liberty
Hawaii:
HAWAII - INDEPENDENT & SOVEREIGN
Thought you guys in the US might want to see these, i thought it would make huge news!

see ya.
don't let the door hit ya in the ass!
if they actually do this, i'd make damn well sure that there'd be absolutely NO TRADE w/ these states, AND limit their access to the USA.