Do the People really establish their government or ...

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Rurudyne. 10th Amendment topic.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Elections are great, if they are fair, but they aren’t. To start with we are burdened with political parties that are extra-constitutional. Note, I didn’t say unconstitutional. However, over time, they have used the two party system to exclude the possibility of any serious third party.

Then, in many States, we are also burdened with open primaries, which are now openly manipulated by both parties to produce less effective candidates.

As an example, John Murtha faced a serious challenge to his seat from a Republican, so he asked two Democrats to change their party affiliation and run against that Republican in the open primary. Then Murtha, unchallenged in the Democrat primary, asked Democrats to vote for one of the two faux-Republicans.

Then the one faux-Republican who won the Republican primary stopped campaigning against Murtha, guaranteeing him reelection.

This effectively disenfranchised all the Republican voters in his district, even though the Republican candidate was ahead of Murtha at the beginning, and would have won in a fair race.

And there are many more dirty tricks, done by both parties to ensure that incumbents are reelected, that money decides the outcome of races, and that those who support federal power are chosen at the expense of those want a return to constitutional principles.

And, with the 17th Amendment, the States are as powerless as are the people.

[OneWingedShark]

You’re assuming that our votes actually mean something.
I am not so sure that they do; given that they are passing legislation where their constituents are calling/faxing/e-mailing en masse, they are passing legislation without READING it, AND above all we now know that the 1st Amendment guarantee to peaceably assemble and present grievances to government is subordinate to permits...

I doubt the Post Office would allow us to show our disapproval by sending them a live bobcat.

No, the way they are ignoring everyone who, even not disagreeing with them on principal but instead, asking them to proceed prudently (IE at least be informed/competent enough to READ the bill before a vote!) then I think that it is unavoidable that conflict should arise; if things do not change course there will be bloodshed.

[xrmusn]

..You’re assuming that our votes actually mean something...etc...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I used to use a tag line “If voting really meant anything, they wouldn’t let us do it”

[xrmusn]

..You’re assuming that our votes actually mean something...etc...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I used to use a tag line “If voting really meant anything, they wouldn’t let us do it”

[MainFrame65]

I have read both of your detailed and thoughtful responses to my question, and I must say that I will need to spend some time and attention digesting these treatises.

I greatly fear that a majority of our “public servants” have decided for themselves to replace “servant” with “commander” or “custodian” or more plainly, “prison guard”.

Lindsey Graham provided the single Republican vote needed to pass the Sotamayor nomination out of committee. That vote was a LOT MORE of a betrayal that just an inexplicable bad decision. I read recently that without at least one minority vote, the nomination would have to go without a recommendation for approval. That minority vote was originally going to come from the usual turncoat, Senator Specter, but when he changes sides they needed a substitute and Senator Grahamnesty stepped right up.

Lamar Alexander voted FOR the “porkulous” bill - one of three Repubs. He claimed that it provided essential benefits for Tennessee that made his vote necessary. I told him that NOTHING justified trying to buy my vote with my own money.

Not long after, he voted FOR CLOTURE on the nomination of Harold Koh to State Dept legal counsel, and then cast a MEANINGLESS vote against the actual nomination, which passed easily. But since that vote, his office flunkies are insisting that he voted AGAINST the nomination. When I verified my original accusation, I called back to call them - and the Senator - the liars they certainly are.

I intend to visit every public appearance of every congresscritter I can afford to during this recess - with a broom and a “poop scooper” with signs attached to let them know what they face if they continue their arrogance. I hope others will do the same.

[stevie_d_64]

You may be right about that...

Lemme ask you this...

Do you hope you are wrong about that??? Even though it is a well formulated theory???

When I tell people what I think about this issue, and I tell folks that I believe a majority of Americans are so intellectually laxy that they couldn’t tie their shoes without permission, and some sort of assistance from the Federal government...

I hope it spurns a response that “Ok, I’ll show you!”

Thats what I’m looking for...Play that little reverse psychology thing on them and see if it spreads...

If it works on children, then I’m thinking it might work on our voting age populace...

You know you bring up a good point about the whole reading, or not reading the bill, then voting on it issue...

My US Congressman is quite consistent when it comes to knowing the basics of a bill even if they are not even given a chance to read it...He’ll go the way I would if I voted on it...

The probnlem I have with even that is if the bill is a bad bill, and you vote against it, even if you haven’t read it, is that even the right thing to do???

I’m not saying abstain from the vote, or vote “present” like Obama liked to do at one time...

I wonder of a failure to maintain a quorum could really be a basic form of putting the skids on something like this...

Just shooting from the hip...

What do you think???

[stevie_d_64]

You and OWShark bring up some good stuff, I have to tell you...

In the case of the Murtha re-election (after all his BS we had to put up with), apparently nothing the democrat party did was a violation of the law...Everyone knows and understands what they did, and why...

The first thing is thst if Murtha was such an anchor to the democrats, if they were going to go through all this trouble to cancel out the Republican party candidate for that seat, why did they not just tell Murtha to step aside??? And put one of their goobs in the spot to replace him???

What amazes me about all of that is that the Republican party allowed those two democrat turned Republicans to actually get into this mix...

Seems to me if the goose is good for the gander, the Republican leadership should learn from this...

If our methods of selecting individuals to represent us has gotten this childish, maybe tossing the whole lot would be a good place to start...

I’ll tell you guys a little secret...We’ll all still get up in the morning, eat breakfast, go to work, laugh at the outcome of this...And at the end of the day, the sun will still go down in the west...And in the morning it comes back up in the east...

I believe our government for the most part is embarrasing us...It certainly is building itself up to be tyrranical, but it is extremely embarrasing to know that we have elected a bunch of children to run this show...And they are proving their worth everyday...

Time to spank the entire lot and send the home...

[stevie_d_64]

You have the right idea...Many more in your district need to show up and keep the pressure on till they correct themselves, or just flat out quit and let other folks in their that will do the job correctly...

[ForGod'sSake]

Thanks Civ!

An interesting essay I hesitate to comment on in my present(some might say more often than not) loopy condition. I've been following the "Kenyan" certifigate business most of my waking hours over the last couple days and am in no condition mentally to do justice to this essay. That said, my impression of Justice Marshall from what little I've gathered about him is that he was a bit of a bully, more interested in having his way than strictly interpretating his contract, the Constitution. IOW, somewhat of a loose cannon. Other's mileage will probably vary...

Click the 10th Amendment button for articles tagged "10thamendment". A "statesrights" link is atop the forum page.

Please ~ping~ me to articles relating to the 10th Amendment/States Rights so I can engage the pinger.

I've stopped scouring threads and unilaterally adding names to the ping list, so if you want on or off the list just say so.

Additional Resources:

Tenth Amendment Chronicles Thread
Tenth Amendment Center
The Right Side of Life/State Initiatives
Sovereign States
Find Law(Brief narrative on 10th Amendment)

CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES

[April Lexington]

We need to dismantle Federal power fast. Strip the legislative and executive functions and restore to the states. Have a small, tightly supervised federal ministry for a clearly defined and limited set of duties. If we don't reel in Congress and the Dictator soon, there will be few non-violent options left...

[April Lexington]

We need to dismantle the Federal governing apparatus and return political power to the states. Look to a Congress of Governors under a seriously trimmed down federal constitution. This monster must be stopped soon or we are all slaves. Too much power and money is detached from the people...

[TheOldLady]

Excellent read and comments, and thanks for the ping BUMP!

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Governments will inherently decay unless there are checks and balances in them. Even the Soviet Union had a “three legged stool” of the communist party, the KGB, and the red army. If one of the three became too powerful, the other two would team up and chop it down to size.

The US constitution with several balances of power. The one most people know is the executive, legislative, and judicial one. But right now the executive branch, and its immense bureaucracy, has become far too powerful. Congress has ceded too much legislative authority to the bureaucracy, and the judiciary has become a bully in its own right.

The real problem lies in a different balance of power, between the federal government, the individual States, and the people. Between the Civil War and the Civil Rights movements, the States lost most of their power. And their most important check, the ability to appoint US senators, was lost in 1913. This left them only the “unthinkable” right to call a constitutional convention.

The power of the people in the equation was also eroded with the use of federal largesse, buying votes to maintain ever growing federal power. So the people have been infringed upon most of all. At no time, short of a wartime military draft, was it intended that the federal government deal with the people directly. The individual States were our shield.

The States have been pushed so hard they are calling “enough” with these now majority of States 10th Amendment resolutions. But the federal government is unwilling, perhaps unable, to change itself. Its momentum has taken over.

With a grotesque economic collapse, though, the States may finally be forced to call a constitutional convention, which on reflection is not as traumatic as it sounds. For the convention remains in effect until it either ends its own mandate, or 3/4ths of the individual States agree to its changes.

Likely, such a convention would have to be held in sequester on a major military installation, prevented from contact with any number of villains who would seek to manipulate it. And even the soldiers of the army guarding it would each be re-sworn to uphold and defend the constitution.

Each State would send two delegates, chosen by the State, not by a popular vote, unless the State agreed to that.

The US government would be a caretaker government, and could not legally vote to tamper with or stop the convention.

Likely, the States would insert a balanced budget amendment, with strict limits on evasion. Much legal precedent would be swept aside, and judges could no longer order States to spend money. The size of the government would be radically reduced. All taxes and efforts at spending within a State would have to go through that State government. That is, the States would pay all federal taxes, outside of international duties and tariffs. Though a federal lottery might be permitted.

The estimated time of the convention would be one year.

[ichabod1]

I would rather send them a live badger or a racoon in a box.

[ichabod1]

This reminds me of the assumption that the taxpayers pay for this or that with their taxes. Hayll noo, taxes are just to keep the schlubs in line. The REAL money is in inflating the money supply.

[ichabod1]

The probnlem I have with even that is if the bill is a bad bill, and you vote against it, even if you haven’t read it, is that even the right thing to do???

If it hasnt' been read, it should be voted against, because you don't know, even if you know the gist of it, whether there are some little gotcha's like "take granny out behind the barn and shoot her" in there.

I'm not being overly stringent, I don't think. Each of these critters has a staff, probably a large staff. If one of each of the critter's ten top people reads 100 pages and explains it to the critter, that's 1000 pages, and the critter can legitimately make a claim to have read it.

[ichabod1]

I don’t know about lettting the state govts appoint the delegates. In too many cases, the state govts are a big part of the problem. If this were going to happen, there should at least be enough of a lead time for the people of the state to make any “adjustments” in their representatives before the delegation took place.

[stevie_d_64]

Do you believe a “counsel” of Governors would be more accountable to the people???

If this were to happen, then ALL the Governors need to be on a two year election cycle...

[April Lexington]

I think state voters can hold a governor accountable for state matters and then national matters. Term limits at the state level would be beneficial as well. We DON’T want to empower the federal component of government. This would allow for a national consensus tied to the popularity of the governor. But, as the federal administrative unit would have no legislative or executive authority, it would keep any one popular governor in check... No more Pelosi terrorizing the Great plains...