Jan Brewer: Extremely Disappointing

Following is Arizona Senator Sylvia Allen’s response to Gov. Jan Brewers veto of SB1182, which would have prohibited state cooperation with NDAA detention.

Earlier this week I received news that the Governor vetoed my bill, SB1182 (called the “2012 NDAA act; governmental compliance”).

I was very disappointed in her veto and her explanation:  “While I unequivocally support the due process rights of all United States citizens, I cannot support legislation that forces law enforcement – under the threat of criminal penalty – to choose between upholding the constitution and laws of the United States and abiding by the laws of Arizona.”

First, the governor shows more concern for a non-existent dilemma of law enforcement officers than for the Constitutional rights of Arizona citizens, which are negated and taken away by NDAA under the color of federal authority.

Second, she contradicts herself.  She says that law enforcement would have to choose between upholding the Constitution and the laws of the United States, OR upholding the laws of Arizona.  Excuse me, but SB1182 was all about upholding the Constitution.  Signing SB1182 would have been an act in favor of upholding the Constitution.  Vetoing it says that our law enforcement officers don’t have to uphold the Constitution – they can just go right ahead and enforce the National Defense Authorization Act, which deprives citizens of their Constitutional rights.

Law enforcement officers and our governor all took an oath to uphold the Constitution.  When Congress comes along with an unconstitutional act like the NDAA that overlooks due process protections, for example, then our state elected officials should honor their oath and say no, thank you, to the federal government.

A Little History

Details

There’s Actually Some Good News?

Add to iTunes

Good news? Surprising, but true. A federal court blocks 1021 of the NDAA, Missouri moves towards sound money, North Carolina to vote on NDAA, New Jersey rejects Obamacare exchanges – and more. Nice to talk about something positive once in a while. But, Joe Wolverton and Mike Maharrey bring some bad news too – not really a downer, just some important truths.

Joe Wolverton discussed the NDAA 2013 passing out of Committee.  He reacted by comments made by some of our representative by saying,”We don’t care about Habeas Corpus.  Habeas Corpus is just the fever.  We are talking about the disease.  The disease is an American citizen being suspected of causing and posing a threat to the homeland being indefinitely detained in a federal prison.”

He pushed the point of nullification by saying, “The fact is we don’t have to obey illegal federal acts, or executive edicts.  Nullification is a sound and timeless principle Constitutional Jurisprudence.  We do not need to enact nullification laws in the states.  We do not need to rely on the courts to strike down this or that provision.  All we need to do is recognize that we as a people in our collective capacity as states created the federal government through the Constitution.”

When asked about the concept that if it isn’t Constitutional then it is not law, Wolverton answered, “The law has a definition, and as being trained as a lawyer I know what it is as do all Americans in their hearts.  You don’t need to be taught what a law is.”

Details

The States Are Already Getting Bailed Out

In today’s Wall Street Journal, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) advise the states to get their fiscal houses in order instead of holding out hope for a bailout from federal taxpayers. That’s sound advice. However, the states already effectively get bailed out by federal taxpayers each and every year.

The first chart shows that the federal government has accounted for over a third of total state spending in recent years. The increase can be attributed to federal “stimulus” spending. The federal government’s share will retreat as the economy (hopefully) continues to strengthen and federal policymakers limit spending increases in the face of mounting debt. However, getting the federal government’s share of total state spending back to, say, 30 percent would be nothing to celebrate.

The post-stimulus decrease in Washington’s generosity to the states has state and local officials—and the special interests that ultimately benefit from the Beltway-to-State money laundering operation—concerned. Reporters typically relay these concerns to the public without adding any historical context. The following chart provides that context, and it indicates that the concern shouldn’t be that the states won’t be getting as much money; rather, the concern should be that the states have become dangerously reliant on federal money.

Details

A century of states’ rights ahead: Who will take Montana?

States rights’, states’ rights, states’ rights . . .! – Texas Governor Rick Perry, April 16, 2009, at The Alamo

A Zen history or anthropology of current times can be drawn on events that have occurred in the past three years, which will undoubtedly change our American world, possibly for a century or two.

Three historic events have occurred and one was iconic: Speaker Nancy Pelosi in October, 2009, shouting, her face contorted in disbelief, at a reporter when asked if there were any Constitutional problems with Obamacare.  “Are you serious,” she replied?  The idea apparently never dawned on her or her Congress.

But just before that, in February, 2009, New Hampshire state Rep. Frank Itse proposed that New Hampshire need not participate in Obamacare, citing Thomas Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions. Twenty-nine states followed, held fast, and brought their case to the Supreme Court. Nowhere in the past century did states block together so convincingly.

The third came this week, when President Obama used his “bully pulpit” to endorse same sex marriage. Thirty states had already brought preemptive legislation in opposition. This time the states were ahead of history.

The states that approve of same sex marriage are either in the upper top right corner of the country (the very old Europeanish states), or the far left (their playground). The vast center (the newer states; some like those in Comanche territory, very new) is universally united in opposition to same sex marriage, and it is these same states which oppose Obamacare. We can see formed by now what might be called the Three Americas, the artsy west edge, the grungy,  post-industrial, northeast, which seems and feels now like all the people with money have moved to Singapore, and then the middle. How closely this resembles an ancient pattern of Rome on one corner, artsy Athens in a far corner. And Gaul rising between the two in the center.

As I recall from seminary school, the Gauls were the bravest of the three.

Details