Posted on 03/05/2009 9:03:47 PM PST by Wpin
NEW YORK – As the Obama administration attempts to push through Congress a nearly $1 trillion deficit spending plan that is weighted heavily toward advancing typically Democratic-supported social welfare programs, a rebellion against the growing dominance of federal control is beginning to spread at the state level.
So far, eight states have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, including Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.
Analysts expect that in addition, another 20 states may see similar measures introduced this year, including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania.
"What we are trying to do is to get the U.S. Congress out of the state's business," Oklahoma Republican state Sen. Randy Brogdon told WND...
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Unfortunately, mine isn’t on the list.
Missouri has a newly elected, trial-lawyer scum Democrat in the Governor’s mansion.
I don’t know if these measures can enacted without Executive branch cooperation.
It’s encouraging, but the Federal Government has the Army and the National Guard.
Tianenmen Square will be taking place in Times Square.
I wonder whose side the different state police forces will be on—the people or the Feds???
If they want to keep Washington out of state business, then they need to stop accepting Federal money.
I was real surprised mine is on it.
The People’s Republic of Michigan.
Do you really think these fascist pigs can get the United States military to make war on any state? You are sorely mistaken if you do.
I’m surprised that Michigan, with Detroit full of obamas and Flint packed with union thugs, is on the list. Seemed more likely to have passed a resolution of solidarity with the Seat of Government.
How say you, Mr. Mag? What do you see from your side of the mitten?
Thank God Alabama is on the list.
well, wouldn’t that be awful? No more federal mandates like on abortion, labor laws, taxation, education, medical, commerce...
I think that most states are so dependent on Federal largess, that they couldn’t survive without it.
I seriously question how much of the Army the FedGove really “has”— and maintain that the National Guards of the several states are under even less federal control, depending on the nature of the orders received.
This, from a veteran of both worlds who, being in the Regular Army during Clinton, had some serious discussions with like-minded fellow soldiers while watching Waco burn...
I'll bet better than 50% would side with the States and The People with this current administration.
When push came to shove even the Russian military fired on Parliament instead of the Russian people.
And there is rhino-repub turncoat new demcrat k koster
Damn, we may just have to go back to being free...
Remember that there would be no Federal largess, if the Feds didn’t take it from the people of the states first.
If we don’t give it, and the states prevent it being forcibly collected...
Does anyone remember — someone mentioned to me recently that Colorado, for a while, had a provision that all money being paid in federal taxes had to pass through the state house first, to ensure the state got a “fair share”?
Mine either! And to add insult to injury, our Governor here thinks he's Barry-O's Mini-Me....talking about REGIONAL Cap and Trade if it doesn't fly nationally!
Does anyone have a feel for whether this actually means anything? I mean, politicians make pronouncements all day long, but will they conduct themselves any differently? Though I’m a great advocate of state’s rights, I would like to hear more about the practical effect of the sovereignty movement.
What I fear is that this is just a bunch of “window dressing”, without any intention on the part of the states to amend their obeisance to Washington. The states have been kneeling at the federal “altar” for an awfully long time. Is a sovereignty measure going to change anything?
Comments?
I can’t help but wonder if California is considering it for all the wrong reasons.
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.