Posted on 02/23/2009 3:12:13 AM PST by Scanian
State governors -- looking down the gun barrel of long-term spending forced on them by the Obama “stimulus” plan -- are saying they will refuse to take the money. This is a Constitutional confrontation between the federal government and the states unlike any in our time.
In the first five weeks of his presidency, Barack Obama has acted so rashly that at least 11 states have decided that his brand of “hope” equates to an intolerable expansion of the federal government’s authority over the states. These states -- Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas -- have passed resolutions reminding Obama that the 10th Amendment protects the rights of the states, which are the rights of the people, by limiting the power of the federal government. These resolutions call on Obama to “cease and desist” from his reckless government expansion and also indicate that federal laws and regulations implemented in violation of the 10th Amendment can be nullified by the states.
When the Constitution was being ratified during the 1780s, the 10th Amendment was understood to be the linchpin that held the entire Bill of Rights together. The amendment states: “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."
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Wow!
I thought I read Schwazenlib in CA would take the cash?
Awesome - we still have good men doing good things.
Obama won’t let a little thing like state sovereignty stop him...
Our governor here in Missouri is already using it to build a bridge, etc.
FDR tried the same tactic and a few governors turned it down too. Unfortunately they were mostly tossed out afterwards. This scam works quite well because the federal actions make people poor and desperate, then uses what little money they have left against them by selectively bribing voters in close districts. Acorn will steal any additional votes that are needed.
Uhh ... New Hampshire is a communist gulag.
I live here.
The governor and more than half the legislature are pie-eyed Obamunists. They worship the ground he soils.
New Hampshire is on the verge of numbering itself among the states that are most hostile to homeschooling.
Sure, a few patriots got the measure introduced in the Legislature. But the legislature is dominated, Chicago thug style, by flaming Obamunists. It doesn’t have a chance.
Poorly written article by the writer. It leaves the impression that Michigan won’t accept the money in Porkulus. The dimwit commie governor of Michigan was on the tube yesterday screaming she wants the pork and will take the money any other state refuses.
The various welfare bums that voted for this numbskull are a real piece of work. They will steal from you, destroy your property and sell you down the river for a piece of silver. You don’t want to know them.
Too bad no governors or legislatures thought the lives of unborn babies were important enough to warrant nullification of Roe v. Wade. But maybe after they realize they have this power, the idea will occur to them.
What kind of stimulus is it when according to the AP, the governors are meeting with Obama THIS MORNING to decide how to spend it?
They get the money and THEN decide what to do with it?
The ones who will have nothing to do with the stimulus package, from what I have heard, are a couple of southern states governors. That was last week though.
Once the states realize they have the right to nullify FOCA--how long will it take before they realize they have the right to nullify Roe v. Wade?
We also may want to think about lawsuits to fight unConstitutional Federal legislation!
Missouri? Our governor did a TV photo op literally the second the bill was signed. Photo op done to show that the stimulus plan was legit and was putting people to work.
“reminding Obama that the 10th Amendment protects the rights of the states, which are the rights of the people, by limiting the power of the federal government.”
He *is* the “new Lincoln”.
[wish my knee padded guv would have the spine to buck ofama]
Pfffft.
MD will no doubt be an “occupied state” once again.
ping
Sic semper tyrannis.
“expansion of the federal government’s” we may see alot of this under the democrats rule.
I thought it was the other way around -- that the States gave to federal government its power. I didn't think Congress had the authority to tell all the states (not just any state) how its own Constitutional structure can function.
How can Congress think it can simply pass a law that overturns the states' own power structures by "giving" the legislatures the right to overturn a governor on this?
-PJ
Obama’s concerned: 11 out of 57 states is a lot.
The “Republic of Texas” still has a nice rign to it. Just saying...
“ring” Oop’s.
I think the states in question ought to take the money and give it directly back to their citizens in proportion to the federal taxes those citizens pay. Get it out of Washington, but keep their collective state hands clean of it.
Let’s see which states are more prosperous in a few years - the ones that spent it on “jobs” or the ones who let their citizen’s have their own money back.
Where is Sarah on this list? She should be leading the charge.
That would be “wasteful” spending
If any states do in fact manage to refuse the money, watch the Federal government continue to tax them, by the end of a barrel of a gun if need be.
Yep!!
“These states — Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas — have passed resolutions reminding Obama that the 10th Amendment protects the rights of the states,...”
I can’t find any evidence that New Hampshire has passed such a resolution. One has been introduced:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html
It looks like the resolution will simply die without a vote. The majority democrats in the committee that studied the resolution judged it “Inexpedient to Legislate”. I imagine it took them all of 2 or 3 minutes to trash it.
The title of the article is a swindle; New Hampshire has NOT “Declared Sovereignty”. As an official position, the government of NH still loves Obama and his Obamunism.
I continue to think the New Hampshire resolution is publicity-seeking hype by the powerless Republicans who remain in the legislature.
Whether that means she'll eventually turn the money down or not, I guess we'll have to wait and see.
California?
Heard Arnold this morning talking about just how dreamy the Stimulus is.
(Used to refer to Arnold as “The Covert Kennedy”...but he’s come fully out of the closet.)
LLS
One AZ Rep has authored a Bill that’s refreshing.
There was a guy from NH (Issa?) on Fox & Friends this AM talking this up. He didn’t seem like the sharpest pencil in the box but his heart appears to be in the right place.
It’s sad when people writing for Human Events (and their editors) have so little clue about how government works.
Too many people seem to believe that just introducing a non-binding resolution in a state legislature will have an effect on the out-of-control federal government.
Even if it passed (which, as you say, it won’t), it doesn’t actually DO anything. It doesn’t require the NH government to refuse to take bailout money, or resist the feds, or anything else. It just attempts to tell the feds what to do, and the last time I checked the NH state legislature doesn’t actually have any authority over the federal government.
Sure, the U.S. constitution says the states have rights, but at least two branches of the federal government simply ignore that. How about a bill requiring the NH government to assert its rights by suing the feds? That wouldn’t pass this legislature either, but at least it would be more than empty words.
I live in NH too, and I agree that it is turning into a communist gulag. Fools keep voting fools into office, and we’re all going to suffer for their foolishness.
First of all, I'm pretty sure NONE of these resolutions have passed even a committee vote. I'm even more certain that NONE have passed the full legislative bodies of these states.
I can give more details about the situation in my home state of Georgia. The original resolution was introduced in 1995, and went nowhere. It was reintroduced as House Resolution 280 in the Georgia General Assembly by Scott Martin. There are 5 other co-sponsors. It is not currently scheduled for a vote.
Many bills and resolutions get introduced like this and never see the light of day. The original version of this resolution in Georgia died without a vote in the 1995-1996 session.
Maybe others can bring us up to speed on this measure in other states. And we should support these measures where they are pending. But don't believe that we can "declare victories" in eleven states. We haven't even started fighting in those states yet.
Absolutely! No victory celebrations called for-—just lots of letter and email writing, phone calls, organized rallies...whatever we can do to support this movement!
Ping to read later; three cheers for state sovereignty!
“There was a guy from NH (Issa?) on Fox & Friends this AM talking this up. He didn’t seem like the sharpest pencil in the box but his heart appears to be in the right place.”
Maybe it was Daniel Itse, who is listed as the principle sponsor of the bill.
The Freedom of Choice Act was the primary impetus for the Missouri bill.
Yes, they are going to be pushing back on federal overreach on abortion.
This is *my* delusional version of “hope and change”.
Don’t mess with it!.....;-D
There are actually 28 that have these resolutions in various stages.
LLL -
do you know the situation with China and Taiwan?
It’s very similar to what you describe. The nationalist (non-communist) Chinese broke off, “rebelled”, from mainland communist China and both claim to BE “China”.
It’s gotta start somewhere.
And the people sponsoring these bills could use some emails and phone calls.
If they don’t get support, then these resolutions will go no further and we’ll just be one big ol’ globular communist country.
MrB wrote:I agree. That's really the point I was trying to make. Looking back, I guess I could have stated that part a bit more clearly.
It’s gotta start somewhere.And the people sponsoring these bills could use some emails and phone calls.
The headline, and the article to some extent, make it sound like this has already been done in eleven states. It's just starting in those eleven states. In those states, there needs to be some grass roots support to move this forward. In other states, there needs to be some support to get someone moving enough to start the process.
Not only that (FOCA), states, if they have keen Constitutional lawyers to monitor resolutions and law changers by states’ legislatures (represent the states in federal courts), one will find that many Fed laws / regulations are unconstitutional and therefore, states have their rights to null and void such. One cannot even begin to categorize the overreach from our fed goobermint.
I will not live under a marxist/sharia regime. I pray to GOD that this never comes to pass... but if pushed to the brink, the States have these rights that were the very first sentence written into our Declaration of Independence. It is the very FIRST LAW of the LAND!
LLS
To anyone who isn’t a leftist/collectivist, the Constitution’s pretty clear.
Congress is the seat of legislation (law). Nothing else should have the force of law.
Congress is limited to passing laws that have to do with the powers enumerated in Article I, Section 8.
The 10th Amendment clarifies this in that all powers not delegated to the fedgov by this enumeration nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states.
Of course, that’s just way too logical for the wizards of smart, because it leaves no room for their superior intellect and morality to be forced on everyone else.
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.