by Becky Akers, originally posted at LewRockwell.com Several of you have been kind enough to forward me Rep[ulsive] John Mica’s [R-FL] interview with Human Events in which he blasts the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Thanks. I didn’t rush to read it because this is old news: Mica has pretty much made a career out of bashing – rightfully…Details
cross-posted from the New Jersey Tenth Amendment Center This is a comment I had posted in response to an article on nj.com regarding Carl Lewis’ run for New Jersey State Senate. I am unsure whether the author, Matt Friedman, supports or opposes this action, but felt the issue definitely required a response: I have to admit, being disillusioned…Details
Patriot Act, TSA and the Alien and Sedition Acts. Tom Woods and Mike Church join Judge Napolitano on Freedom Watch to talk about government power, the Constitution – and nullification. “in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the…Details
by Jon Roland, cross-posted from Obitur Dictum With increasing talk about the infirmity of fiat currencies, more people are talking about a return to the gold standard, but is that a feasible option? It is said that it does not matter that growth in the supply of gold has not kept up with growth in…Details
cross-posted from the Pennsylvania Tenth Amendment Center
According to wikipedia,
“The Liberty Song” is an American Revolutionary War song composed by patriot John Dickinson, the author of Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania. The song is set to the tunes of “Heart of Oak”, the anthem of the Royal Navy of the United Kingdom and “Here’s a Health”, an Irish song of emigration. The song itself was first published in the Boston Gazette in July 1768.
James Madison outlined the blueprint states can use to resist unconstitutional federal overreach in Federalist 46.
Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular States, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union, the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassment created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, very serious impediments; and were the sentiments of several adjoining States happen to be in Union, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.
It appears state resistance to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could create just the kind of impediments Madison envisioned.
The New York Times reports state lawmakers in New York have managed to block the state from seeking federal grants needed to set up health insurance exchanges. Gov. Andrew Cuomo proposed forming the necessary exchange, and the Democratic Party controlled State Assembly approved the plan, but the Republican controlled Senate refused to take up the measure before adjourning the regular session in June and lawmakers appear in no hurry to return the Albany.Details
This dreaded clause was placed into the fourteenth amendment which basically destroys a states ability to interfere with the fourteenth amendment since any state law that attempts to do so will simply be overridden by a federal law that was made in pursuance of that particular power. The same clause also exist for amendments thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty-three, twenty-four, and twenty-six which makes it impossible for states to interfere or legitimately enforce those particular amendments because any federal law that does so would be superior to a state law that attempts to do the same thing. This means that states can’t enforce these amendments in any meaningful way since any federal law that does so would override any state law made with the same power and this may seem like an argument against state nullification but it actually provides the strongest justification for state nullification.
When the people who wrote those amendments gave that power to the federal government they established that the power to enforce the constitution legislatively does exist. It can not be denied that such a power exists because it is plainly written into it so the only question left is who has that power. Is it the states or the federal government? It is clearly given to the federal government for those amendments listed above but where it was not delegated to the federal government it is squarely reserved to the states. The federal government only has the power to enforce those particular amendments but where that power was not delegated to the federal government and/or where it is not prohibited by the constitution then that power rightfully belongs to the states. The power to enforce the constitution has not been denied to the states by the constitution and the federal government only has that power for a few sections of the constitution which means that under the tenth amendment states have the legal ability to enforce the constitution where it has not been granted to the federal government.Details
cross-posted from the Pennsylvania Tenth Amendment Center
I was pleased to deliver the presentation below to the Philadelphia Tea Party Patriots of Central Montgomery County on Thursday evening (September 8, 2011). It was encouraging to see this group in action, with it’s focus on the core issues of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets. Central Montgomery County is one of the areas in Pennsylvania with its own unique Tenth Amendment history.
We would like to say “Thank you” to the group and its leadership for the opportunity to visit. You can use the contact page to get in touch with us about speaking to your group.Details
Obama’s new jobs plan contains additional subsidies for state and local government, including money for school construction.
My colleagues Adam Schaeffer and Andrew Coulson have explained that money to build schools is one of the last things that the government school system needs (see here and here). There will probably be money for “hiring teachers” and other targets that the administration thinks will play well with the electorate – not to mention government employee unions.
The electorate – and reporters covering the president’s plan – should understand that subsidies to state and local government have gone through the roof since 2000:
A Cato essay on federal aid to state and local government explains why these subsidies should be abolished, not increased. The following are five fundamental reasons:Details