Kansas legislation will protect right to keep and bear arms

TOPEKA, Kan.  – As of February 1, 2012, The latest on HB2421 was a Committee Report recommending that the bill be passed as amended by Committee on Federal and State Affairs.

During this brief lull in activity, the Tenth Amendment movement has a great opportunity to help keep this important bill in the forefront of the minds of Kansas leadership. To do that, we ask that you take a moment to contact them utilizing the below information in the “Take Action” section, and politely explain why you are serious about the protection of our Constitutional rights. Remember – If the Firearm Freedom Act should pass in Kansas, it will undoubtedly encourage other states in upholding the second amendment’s right to keep and bear arms.

As HB2421 reads, “The tenth amendment to the constitution of the United States guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Kansas certain powers as they were understood at the time that Kansas was admitted to statehood in 1861. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Kansas and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Kansas in 1859 and the United States in 1861.”


Who Can Initiate War

Recent presidents have so mutilated the clear language of the Constitution as to the authority to make war that congressional pushback, even from the weak Congress we now have, was inevitable.   That pushback came in a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing when Joint Chief of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey inferred that the authority that he depended upon was not from Congress, as required in the U. S. Constitution, but from unelected UN or NATO authorities.  

Senator Jeff Sessions, Chairman of the Committee, then interviewed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and was given the same response.  Disbelieving what he heard, Sessions repeatedly inquired in different ways only to be given the same answer.  (See YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNwOeyuG84)  Even the President’s voice did not appear to be as important as that of the UN or NATO.

Constitutional clarity is so strong with respect to Congress alone having sole power of war that it is hard to imagine that such statements are due to gross ignorance alone.  This is one of the most critical moments in U. S. History with respect to liberty.  If the Executive Branch of government can effectively remove the power to initiate war from Congress, giving it to itself, and then to some international coalition such as the U. N. or NATO, we essentially lose our sovereignty and our armies used as the policemen of the world.  

Would not the recipient of such power, the United Nations, not then become the dreaded world government?  Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution, preserving Americas right to fight whomever, would be effectively destroyed.


ACTION ALERT: Help Arizona Pass NDAA Nullification Bill Now

PHOENIX (March 23, 2012)  – The progress of an Arizona bill blocking compliance with federal agents attempting to enforce detention provisions written into the National Defense Authorization Act has slowed in the House after quickly passing the Senate and moving out of one important House committee. If you live in Arizona, you can help it move forward. See Action items below.

SB1182 would “prohibit any agency of the state from providing material support for or from participating in any way with the implementation of sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, Public Law 112‑81, against any citizen of the United States.”

Last week, the bill passed out of the House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee by a 6-3 vote keeping it on track for final House approval. But the bill still needs passage out of the House Rules Committee before moving on to a House Caucus for a second reading. If it passes that, it will proceed to the Committee of the Whole for debate and then on to a final vote.

As of March 22, SB1182 was not slated for consideration by the Rules Committee or on the Caucus calendar. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center indicate that that House Speaker told bill sponsor Sen. Sylvia Allen that he will move the bill forward. But the House Speaker and Senate President tend to hold legislators’ favorite bills in order to have something to blackmail them with when the legislator considers the budget. “Vote for this budget or I’ll kill your bills!”  The Arizona budget reportedly remains stalled at the moment, increasing the likelihood leadership will hold bills that they know the members especially want.


An Administration Gone Rogue

by Ron Paul

Have certain parts of the Constitution become irrelevant, as a former Republican leader once told me at a Foreign Affairs Committee hearing? At the time, I was told that demanding a Congressional declaration of war before invading Iraq, as Article I Section 8 of the Constitution requires, was unnecessary and anachronistic. Congress and the president then proceeded without a Constitutional declaration and the disastrous Iraq invasion was the result.

Last week, Obama administration officials made it clear that even the fig leaf of Congressional participation provided by the 2003 “authorization” to use force in Iraq was to be ignored as well. In a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta stated clearly and repeatedly that the administration felt it was legally justified to use military force against Syria solely with “international permission”.

Such “international permission” could come by way of the United Nations, NATO, or some other international body. Secretary Panetta then told Senator Sessions that depending on the situation, the administration would consider informing Congress of its decision and might even seek authorization after the fact.

While Senator Sessions expressed surprise at the casual audacity of Panetta in making this statement, in reality his was just a bluntly stated explanation of what has been, de facto, the case for many years. When President Obama committed the US military to a pre-emptive war against Libya last year, for example, Congress was kept completely out of the process. Likewise, military action in Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and so on, proceed without a Congressional declaration.


ACTION ALERT: Health Care Nullification Bill in New Jersey!

New Jersey A861 would render the federal “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”  null and void in the state.  Sponsored by Assemblywoman Alison L. McHose, this bill not only voids the insurance mandate,  it declares the entire act null and void within the state.

“This bill renders the federal “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” Pub.L.111-148, as amended by the federal “Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010,” Pub.L.111-152, and any federal rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, null and void and of no force and effect in the State of New Jersey.”

A861 currently sits in the Assembly Health and Senior Services Committee. Your help is needed to get it moving towards a floor vote (action steps below)


The bill itself provides the rational for nullification, based on the Tenth Amendment:


Paul Ryan’s Budget: It’s Still Big Government

Chris Edwards provided an ample overview of Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget proposal, so I won’t rehash the numbers. Instead, I’ll just add a few comments.

Democrats and the left will squeal that Paul Ryan’s budget proposal is a massive threat to the poor, the sick, the elderly, etc, etc. It’s baloney, but a part of me thinks that he might deserve it. Why? Because the excessive rhetoric employed by the left to criticize lower spending levels for domestic welfare programs isn’t much different than the excessive rhetoric Ryan uses to argue against sequestration-induced reductions in military spending. For instance, Ryan speaks of the “devastation to America’s national security” that sequestration would allegedly cause. (See Christopher Preble’s The Pentagon Budget: Myth vs. Reality).

Now I’m sure that I’ll receive emails admonishing me for failing to recognize that the Constitution explicitly gives the federal government the responsibility to defend the nation while the constitutionality of domestic welfare programs isn’t quite so clear. Okay, but what are Ryan’s views on the constitutionality of domestic welfare programs?

At the outset of Ryan’s introduction to his plan, he quotes James Madison and says that the Founders designed a “Constitution of enumerated powers, giving the federal government broad authority over only those matters that must have a single national response, while sharply restricting its authority to intrude on those spheres of activity better left to the states and the people.” That’s nice, but then he proceeds to make statements like this:


Time to Resist REAL ID

The “Repeal the REAL ID Act” is DownsizeDC.org’s oldest active campaign.

It is also one of our most successful. Public outrage from the Left, Right, and Middle has persuaded many state legislatures to refuse to implement it. The Obama Administration, which to its credit doesn’t like this Bush-era law, keeps issuing waivers and deadline extensions on the states.

But REAL ID’s author, James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), is holding hearings this week, no doubt to try to build pressure on the Obama Administration to enforce this unconstitutional law.

That’s why it is important to raise our voices today. Tell Congress to repeal the REAL ID Act and replace it with nothing.

You may borrow from or copy this letter…

Rep. Sensenbrenner, the author of the REAL ID Act, along with House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith will try to drum up support for REAL ID by holding hearings this week.

Don’t be fooled by the inevitable scare-mongering of these hearings. You would be wise to take the opposite approach and REPEAL Real ID.

The law simply can’t function…

* 25 states refuse to comply with REAL ID.
* It would strip citizens of those states the right to air travel.
* Which would wreck the airline industry (and overall economy), and anger tens of millions of Americans.

To be blunt, if you insist on REAL ID enforcement, you would deliberately act against the best interests of the United States and the people, and commit political suicide.

Moreover, these states have GOOD REASON to reject REAL ID…


Ending Indefinite Detention Through Nullification

On Tuesday, March 20, 2012, the Tenth Amendment Center, in partnership with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee and Demand Progress, held a joint media conference to brief journalists about national momentum against NDAA detention powers. The following is what was introduced by Blake Filippi at the start of that conference

NOTE: Blake Filippi will be a featured speaker at Nullify Now! Philadelphia. Get tickets here – http://www.nullifynow.com/philadelphia/ – or by calling 888-71-TICKETS


My name is Blake Filippi, director of the Rhode Island Liberty Coalition and spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center.

In 1850, when Congress passed what was known as the “Fugitive Slave Act,” the federal law compelled people of all states to assist federal agents with the apprehension of suspected runaway slaves and brought all trials involving alleged fugitive slaves under federal jurisdiction. It included large fines for anyone who aided a slave in their escape, even by simply giving them food or shelter. The act also suspended habeas corpus and the right to a trial by jury for suspected slaves, and made their testimony non-admissible in court.

This was an atrocity.


State and local legislators speak out about anti-NDAA efforts

by Amy Ferrer, Bill of Rights Defense Committee Today, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, together with a transpartisan coalition of the Tenth Amendment Center and Demand Progress, hosted a teleconference on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the state and local efforts opposing it across the country. Four state and local elected officials…