Skip to comments.Washington State Introduces Claim to State Sovereignty
Posted on 02/06/2009 11:19:30 AM PST by ForGod'sSake
Legislatures in Washington State have introduced legislation claiming state sovereignty. This legislation sends a strong message that many believe the 10th Amendment still stands.
The legislation was first read a few days ago, on January 30th. It was then referred to the Committee on State Government and Tribal Affairs. While some will claim it has little chance of passing we cannot underplay the importance of the message it sends to the country. Washington State legislators have joined with New Hampshire legislators in putting our original form of a Federalist Republic in the forefront of thought at a critical time in our history.
Reading through "House Joint Memorial 4009" is like taking a ride through the history of the 10th Amendment. There are praises for the contribution by stating in lines 17 through 19, "WHEREAS, Federalism is the constitutional division of powers between the national and state governments and is widely regarded as one of America's most valuable contributions to political science;" and goes on to quote the words of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton. Two potential side benefits are a must read for all political science classes and a great foundation for high school debate teams even if their legislation never leaves committee.
If you are one of the many who long for the restoration of our promise of the Declaration of Independence through the road map of our Constitution you will truly enjoy the ending statements from Page 2, Lines 36 and 37 combined with Page 3, Lines 1 through 8.
"NOW THEREFORE, Your Memorialists respectively resolve:
(1) That the State of Washington hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and
(2) That this serves as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States established it and to cease and desist, effective immediately, any and all mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers."
Among his "15 Key Principles of the Founding Fathers" Gary Alder teaches "The 9th and 10th Amendments are the keystones to preservingFreedom." as number 14. Keystones are central supporting elements and it is apparent some in Washington State and New Hampshire recognize the critical nature of the 10th Amendment and state sovereignty. Which state will be the next to claim their sovereignty?
These bills are most likely destined to die in some obscure subcommittee, and never be heard from again. Pity.
Most excellent rant but consider that two of the states, NH and Washington, playing around with this “resolution” are under the mistaken notion that marxism is a good thing. The outlier now is Arizona who I was just made aware of is playing with it also. Somebody planted a seed with some conservative legislators wihtin these states, and we are now involved in a quasi-serious discussion re states rights. Regardless, I welcome the discussion.
This is off topic, but I think that some of you might find it interesting. A friend of mine just called to tell me that her Regents, union health insurance, just turned her down for knee surgery, saying that it was caused by obesity and could not be covered. She asked if she had a heart attack would that be covered, and the answer was no, not if it was written up as attributed to obesity.
We're getting there.
That’s a pretty good assessment IMO.
Burges, Ash, Biggs, Boone, Gowan, Mason, Montenegro, Pancrazi, Seel,
Williams: Barto, Campbell CL, Court, Crandall, Crump, Driggs, Fleming,
Goodale, Hendrix, Kavanagh, Lesko, McComish, McGuire, Miranda B, Murphy,
Nichols, Pratt, Quelland, Stevens, Tobin, Weiers JP, Senator Harper
A concurrent RESOLUTION
under the tenth amendment to the constitution of the united states over certain
powers, serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain
mandates and providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “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”; and
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment
defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by
the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
Whereas, the scope of power defined
by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the
states specifically to be an agent of the states; and
Whereas, today, in 2009, the states
are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and
Whereas, many federal laws are
directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment
assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign
state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal
government may not usurp; and
Whereas, Article IV, section 4,
United States Constitution, says in part, “The United States shall
guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”,
and the Ninth Amendment states that “The enumeration in the Constitution,
of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
by the people”; and
Whereas, the United States Supreme
Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992),
that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory
processes of the states; and
Whereas, a number of proposals from
previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration
and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring, that:
1. That the State of
Arizona hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution
of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to
the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
2. That this Resolution
serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease
and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these
constitutionally delegated powers.
3. That all compulsory
federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or
criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose
federal funding be prohibited or repealed.
4. That the Secretary of
State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this resolution to the
President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the
Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House
and the President of the Senate of each states legislature and each Member of
Congress from the State of Arizona.
They’re expecting Obama to increase the power of the federal government and encroach on the states, an encroachment, though fine for now, that will not be tolerated once a Republican takes the presidential helm. At that point this document will come back up as a back drop to defiance of such federal encroachment.
So it would seem. I suspect a conservative SOMEONE created this "resolution" and passed it around to some conservative state legislators in hopes of ginning up some awareness of the original concept of sovereign state vs feral government. Good on 'em!
No surprise at all. Saw it coming a long time ago from far far away.
Could be I suppose. I just find it strange that a state chock full of wing nuts would suddenly find their copy of the Federalist Papers and the U.S. Constitution.
Good on those guys/gals. Are you familiar with any of those sponsoring this resolution?
If you look at the sponsorship of this bill it is all Republicans, not one Democrat.
It’s the Anti-Federalist papers that have the good stuff, predictions about how the powers granted would be expanded and misused.
And they’re pretty much on target!
Nope, I live in Oregon, land of the government fed slugs.
I think there's something else at work here. I'd bet 25¢ these resolutions are sponsored exclusively by conservative state legislators. Just a hunch.
Our conservatives are more frustrated because we are surrounded by flaming libs?
Washington is actually fairly conservative compared to our neighbor to the south.
Our concealed Carry permits require a basic background check.
Minimum ag. lot size is 5 acres, as opposed to Oregons 40/80/220.
All male citizens between the ages of 21 to 45 are members of the state militia acording to the constitution (How cool is that, even die hard liberals are unknowingly members of the Washington State Militia).
I can get an ag. building permit for $25, and statement of how it will be used. Because of the draconian farm size restrictions in Oregon, Building a barn in requires a lot of effort (Filling farm plans, etc.) including convincing a state bureau-crat that yes, this barn IS needed, and will be a barn, and you will not be living in it.
I know a couple in Oregon who make thier living from a berry farm of 35 acres, and can not build a house because the state believes they CANNOT make a living with that little land.
As for New Hampshire, they are about the cheapest state in existance, to the point of auctioning off thier road kill.
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.