Posted on 02/11/2009 4:23:28 PM PST by ADReditor
Two days ago Sheridan Folger, one of our Senior Writers and the Co-Founder of Let’s Get Theis Right.com and Conservative Solutions.org, wrote a very thought provoking article concerning the desire of many New Hampshire citizens to declare their sovereignty from the leftist Obama influenced law makers of Washington DC and their attempts to put a stranglehold on their state should they decide to further infringe on their states rights.
Much like my state of Texas, the voters of New Hampshire have always considered themselves “keepers of the flame” when it comes to preserving and reserving the right of the state to withdraw their support for an over-reaching federal government by force should it be necessary.
(Excerpt) Read more at americandailyreview.com ...
What?!
Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 33 on January 3, 1788, “If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.”
It was universally understood by the Framers——and the State governments that ratified the Constitution——that the States were the supreme governments and that the federal government was the subserviant, limited agent of the States, authorized to carry out only the specific and enumerated powers delegated in the Constitution. If the President wanted to Proclaim something (especially something not specifically authorized in the Constitution), he had to ask the Governors or legislatures of the States for their approval and assistance.
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.” —James Madison, author of the Constitution, in Federalist Paper No. 45.
“It is not by the consolidation, or concentration, of powers, but by their distribution that good government is effected.” —Thomas Jefferson
..But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole. The same combinations, in short, would result from an apprehension of the federal, as was produced by the dread of a foreign, yoke; and unless the projected innovations should be voluntarily renounced, the same appeal to a trial of force would be made in the one case as was made in the other. But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity?” —James Madison, from Federalist Paper No. 46
“I, George Washington, do further declare, that because the people of Massachusetts have perpetrated this brazen treason, all their rights are forthwith revoked. Of course, if any Massachusetts resident disavows his state’s dastardly decision, and swears an oath of loyalty to the federal government, his rights shall be restored. Such cases excepted, federal soldiers should feel free to loot any Massachusetts home. Crops not seized for army provisions should be destroyed without regards to the needs of the rebels and their families. After all, war is hell.
“Glad you’re here.”
Me, too! It was a nice PING after a long day of work, all the while thinking of the CONFISCATORY Federal & State Taxes taken out of my hide while I was gainfully employed!
Now I’m revved up to ‘Fight the Good Fight.’ :)
Keep ‘em comin’! :)
And would we be FReepers of the Flame"?
Gotta run gather up a sick grandbaby so I'll check back in approaching the wee hours.
“If you believe a state can withdraw from the Union you are barking up the wrong tree.
Federal funding does not come from “the states” it comes from American citizens”
Let us consider the argument relied on to support this view.
Great reliance is placed upon the words of the preamble: “We, the people of the United States,”
Let’s see if that holds water?
Declarations of Mr. Madison, in the Federalist, No. 39. Speaking of the ratifications by the States, he says: “This assent and ratification is to be given by the people, not as individuals composing an entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they respectively belong. * * * Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act.”
Events then were what Washington warned about in his Farewell Address. Most people incorrectly believe it was a warning about foreign involvements when, in fact, it warned of secession and civil war.
Please add me to your pinglist
Your quotations do not address the point of my post.
States were not sovereign even theoretically after the Constitution was ratified. Then never were in reality though perhaps in theory under the Articles. Nor could they get out of the Union after ratification as Madison made clear to Hamilton in letters written during the NY ratification debates. The Constitutional Convention explicitly rejected the argument that the document allowed only specific powers to be exercised by the feds as well. Hamilton defined constitutionality in his argument on the constitutionality of the National Bank.
State “governments” NEVER ratified the Constitution as you claim. State governments were deliberately by-passed for conventions called of the People IN states. Congress understood that the State governments were dominated by petty politicians concerned only about themselves and opposed to a government strong enough to bring our nation together and make it strong. It also understood that any state legislative act could be unilaterally undone which made a perpetual Union impossible.
In addition your comment about what the Framers believed is complete fantasy certainly nothing either Madison (who was ready to get rid of the states entirely early in the convention) or Hamilton (who despised the corrupt state governments) believed.
The quote from Madison actually shows why the federal government has grown at the expense of the state. The requirements of war and foreign relations has grown far more important than it had when we were a out-of-the-way backwater on the world stage. Now we occupy the center.
Jefferson is the last person one should quote when concerned about the Constitution and what it means. He didn’t even believe the Louisiana Purchase constitutional nor the Bank which made it possible.
Madison’s belief that the states would resist a federal government stepping out of bounds can be said to show that states do NOT believe it has happened or that they don’t care.
Sherman myth goes marching on. People hundreds of miles away from the March claim his soldiers burned out “Ole Grandpappy and raped the Missus.” When idiots are followed into political suicide things are tough for lots of innocent people along with plenty of the guilty. Those who perpetrated the RAT Rebellion were traitors.
It was Madison who believed once a state was in the Union it was always in the Union or so he told Hamilton in rejecting acceptance of a conditional ratification. Hamilton was about to throw in the towel and accept that from the NY state ratification convention. Madison said “No!”
BTW that “sovereignty” Madison mentions was ONLY in relation to the ratification. It could not be coerced by another state. And there was no other mechanism available for the expression of the political will EXCEPT through state mechanisms.
But Congress was clear that it wanted the decision taken OUT of the hands of the states. It specified special conventions out of the control of state governments.
I’m thinking I could hold off my share of federal troops....the ones that you could actually get to fire on US citizens....I should be good to hold down one to two rifle companies, from my mountainous area in NH. The taliban got nothing on a pissed off american when it comes to insurgency.
Ohhhhh, I like that!
Done. Good to have another aboard.
lol - that was easy
I hope my pings are helping you out some.
If you wouldn't mind playing devil's advocate for a bit, what remedies do you see available to the states or to the people? Let's assume "the people", after decades of misinformation and basic laziness haven't a clue their government is using our Constitution for toilet paper. Assume also the states have been intimidated and bludgeoned into submission by the fedguv so they no longer feel adequate to the challenge of holding that fedguv to its Constitutional restraints. What next?
BTW, Washington offered several warnings in his farewell address. One of which was to guard against those that would usurp power by bypassing the restraints of the Constitution. As far as I could tell, he didn't propose any remedy for such a thing. What might he have done?
You claim:
“State “governments” NEVER ratified the Constitution as you claim. State governments were deliberately by-passed for conventions called of the People IN states.”
Yet the Constitution itself says in Article VII:
“The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”
The ratifying documents of the various states can be seen here: www.usconstitution.net/otherdocs.html#rats
You also seem to suffer from some strange notion that Congress had something to do with the constitutional convention. In fact, as far as the Congress of the old confederation knew, the convention was negotiating an amendment to the then current Articles of Confederation, the actual nature of the convention being a tightly held secret.
On the up-side, your handle is accurate.
Add me.
We can only link the source.
Done J J. How you been?
Great article! I'll see if I can figure out a way to get it posted or otherwise get more exposure. NOTHING under Goober news or Yeehaaaw news. Surprised?
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.