Archive | November, 2010

Larry Greenley has written a long, but interesting and thought-provoking article on changing vs enforcing the constitution on a state level. Here’s an excerpt:

The movement to restore the Constitution, however, has encountered a fork in the road. One path builds on the Tenth Amendment movement by introducing and passing measures in state legislatures to nullify various unconstitutional federal laws, such as federal firearms laws and ObamaCare. Let’s call this choice, “States Enforce the Constitution.” The adherents of the second path seek to convince constitutionalists that what’s needed to rein in the federal government is a constitutional convention (Con-Con) as provided for by Article V of the Constitution to propose some new amendments to the Constitution. Let’s call this choice, “States Revise the Constitution.”

To choose the correct choice, we must understand the problem — namely that all three branches of the federal government routinely disregard major portions of the Constitution, despite the fact that the original 13 states created a compact, or agreement, designating as their agent, a federal government composed of executive, legislative, and judicial branches with their powers enumerated in the Constitution.

Thus, the states must re-assert themselves soon as the parties to the original compact that established the federal government as their agent and enforce the Constitution, or face eventual extinction at the hands of the federal government. As James Madison wrote regarding the states, “There can be no tribunal above [the states’] authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated.”

The enforcement-through-state-nullification route builds on the ideas of the Founders and posits that the states, which created the federal government in the first place, can begin re-asserting themselves immediately by virtue of their superior status as the creators of the federal government and by using those powers never delegated to the federal government. In contrast, revising the Constitution through an Article V convention would not immediately reassert the dominance of the states over the federal government; hence, the federal government would be permitted to continue to operate according to its self-assigned role as ultimate arbiter of violations of the constitutional compact. This in turn would delay the necessary reassertion by the states of their superior status over the federal government while everyone is kept waiting for a possible realignment of state-federal power to emerge from an Article V constitutional amendment process. Meanwhile, the federal government would continue to increase its control over the states and their citizens — taking our freedoms, rights, and money.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST

Massachusetts has a long, proud history of farming. Drive into the small towns West of Metro Boston and it’s hard not to notice an orchard, dairy, or signs for one of our many local farmer’s markets. A few minute’s drive from my home will bring you to Bolton – a right to farm community. A few minute’s drive in the other direction, and you’re in Lancaster, where a pick-your-own orchard gave me my first job in Massachusetts, when I moved here in 2001. One more town over from Lancaster and you’re in Sterling, where the Davis family, farming for over 100 years, turned a disaster on their family-owned dairy into Davis Farmland – a local attraction dedicated to educating children and conservation of endangered livestock. All of this, and more, is threatened by the provisions in S 510, The FDA Food Modernization Act.

The Food Modernization Act was primarily written to force American food producers and exporters into compliance with international treaties that the United States has entered regarding the import and export of agricultural products. To the extent that the bill will regulate the exportation and importation of food in international commerce, it is constitutional. However, there are serious constitutional and economic issues with the bill in how it deals with small, local farms.

One of the act’s main initiatives is to make all food produced in the United States traceable. The motives behind this initiative seem honorable on their face. Essentially, the act says food must be traceable in order to protect public health. Continue Reading →

The politicians in DC have proven that they are no longer capable of governing in the best interests of the several states and have long used the courts to usurp powers granted to the states via the 10th Amendment by invoking the General Welfare clause, theCommerce clause and/or the Necessary and Proper clause.

The states have always had the power to rein in the federal government through an Article V Convention, otherwise known as an Amendments Convention, when “on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, [Congress] shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof,”. While it is a very little used tactic, just the threat of one can be enough to nudge Congress into action, as was the case with the 17th Amendment and possibly the 21st, 22nd and 25th Amendments as well*.

Today we have the perfect storm forming with the strength of the Tea Party along with the overall awareness of the American people that the federal government has grown too large and does not operate in the best interest of them or the states. Continue Reading →

New Jersey State Senator Michael Doherty is drafting legislation to “rein in TSA Abuses” – the following is from the official press release (h/t Tom Woods):

Senator Michael Doherty, a member of the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee, issued the following statement regarding legislation he is drafting to curb the abuses of civil liberties by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

“I am of the belief that our society is founded upon our ability to exercise our individual civil liberties freely, and I stand ready and willing to defend those liberties when they are threatened. It is with great sadness that I have come to recognize that one of our greatest threats have been presented by officials of the TSA that have begun to implement intrusive searches of law abiding Americans who are traveling within our borders,” Doherty stated.

“In response to the attitudes and actions of the TSA and top Obama Administration officials, I am drafting new legislation that will make it perfectly clear that in New Jersey, our constitutionally granted civil liberties are treasured and will be protected. I am calling upon my colleagues in the legislature to step up and co-sponsor legislation that will protect the rights of citizens in New Jersey,” Doherty continued.

“If an individual is touched in a private area during a search, when there is no arrest or probable cause that is affirmed by oath or affirmation, the person who violated that individual’s privacy will be guilty of the crime of “sexual assault”, and will not be immune from prosecution in the state of New Jersey.”

“If an image is generated that provides detail of an individual’s private parts that violates New Jersey’s privacy or child pornography statutes, the person who generated that image will not be immune from prosecution in the state of New Jersey.”

Finally, if imaging technology that uses technologies that are believed by the legislature to be dangerous to individuals due to their broad or random use in security applications such as airports, the state of New Jersey will prohibit such use and will provide no immunity to individuals who violate any New Jersey state law in New Jersey.

“When the federal government is actively limiting the liberties and rights of law-abiding American citizens, the Several States have both a right and obligation to respond to misguided leadership at the federal level,” Doherty concluded. “I believe that one of the founders of the nation addressed this issue most eloquently: ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety,” Ben Franklin.

Sounds a lot like Nullification and Interposition to me. Keep at it!

I have been watching the news and cringe at the interviews where a reporter is standing in a terminal interviewing a traveler regarding security procedures. These words have become all too common and frankly scare me, “whatever it takes” to keep us safe. OK, let’s explore that sentiment.

The government creates a new security force that is assigned to do “whatever it takes” to keep us safe. A knock comes on your door and it is one of these agents that want to search your home just to make sure you are not a terrorist. You have nothing to hide so you let them in because they are doing “whatever it takes” to keep you safe. Continue Reading →

America 2000 was the name for the great leap forward in education under the first President Bush.  Over time it has evolved into Goals 2000 by Clinton, No Child Left Behind under the second Bush and now we have Race to the Top under Obama.  Not one president or seated congress in session has dared to  dismantle the general government’s Department of Education and the hundreds of billions flushed down its endless slop chute.

Reestablishing our original federalism will take many different steps over time. One important step will be the return of education to the states without any general government interference. That inteference usually comes in the form of money which in turn requires the relinqueshing of sovereignty. Continue Reading →

I thought this was a surprisingly interesting interview…

Online Nullification Training Seminar. The Rightful Remedy to Federal Tyranny. Educate Yourself!

Presented by http://www.WeRefuse.com

Nullification is the legal concept that States have the right to Nullify – i.e. refuse to enforce – unconstitutional Federal laws. In light of the recent passage of Obamacare (which forces citizens to purchase health insurance) and TSA naked scanning of airline passengers (which violates citizens’ Fourth Amendment rights), Nullification as a remedy to federal tyranny is now more important than ever. Continue Reading →

Bow down or be punished. That is the holiday message of the TSA. If a plebian enters the gulag zone at the airport, and then refuses to submit to either the Chertoff radiation-scanner and its naked photo, or the full-body feel-up, and decides to opt out of flying, he will be detained for interrogation, and not allowed to leave. If the human being leaves the gulag zone, in disobedience to the Blue Shirts, he will be fined $11,000, and perhaps arrested too.