If you are wondering exactly how to get involved in pushing back against Obamacare and Health Exchanges in Oklahoma, read this PDF flier. Specifically you can: Contact your legislators and have them sign the letter on page two of the PDF, then send their responses to us Support Nullification through Mike Ritze’s bill, as well as demanding…Details
An Open Letter to the Members of the Tennessee General Assembly – use as a template to write legislators in your own state!
It’s time for our efforts to nullify Obamacare in Tennessee to pick up steam. Our next step is to start a campaign to contact legislators to let them know that we expect them to act quickly to stop Obamacare’s implementation in Tennessee. It is imperative that the legislators at a minimum refuse to cooperate and implement Obamcare via Exchanges or any other means. If the states implement the exchanges state funds come into play, but if states refuse to implement the exchanges then they will be entirely federally funded. Since the federal government doesn’t have the money to implement the exchanges in every state, without state cooperation Obamacare falls apart.
The best course of action is for the state legislature to pass a legally binding nullification of the illegal and unconstitutional Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. A sample template letter is below that you can use to send to your state legislators. Just copy and paste the text below, or write your own letter if you prefer. If you are not certain who your state legislator is, click here to use the Find Your Legislator tool on the Tennessee General Assembly’s web site.
If you haven’t already, click on the “Sign Petition” button on the right hand side of the page to sign the Nullify Obamacare in Tennessee Petition.
Template Letter to Tennessee Legislators
To all those who are elected to serve the people of Tennessee, under an oath to stand for the Constitution:
When the Constitution was young in 1798, the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed, which featured a provision that made speaking ill of the government a crime. Kentucky, led by Thomas Jefferson, and Virginia, led by James Madison, helped pass nullification resolutions in opposition of the unconstitutional legislation. Fast forward five decades and multiple northern states took a stand to nullify the pro-slavery fugitive slave laws, federal legislation that demanded runaway slaves be returned to their owners.Details
Without question, the Constitution was an agreement amongst the several States- not between the states and an existing government. The States created the government and gave it some specific duties and limitations. This is not some case of misunderstanding between a servant government and unhappy constituents.
It is a progressive and clear power grab from the very group that were given very specific duties and told not involve itself in other areas. This is exactly what the Anti-federalist feared when signing off the Constitution and the Federalist assured would not happen. The Anti-Federalist were persuaded that if the federal government went too far, they (the States) would be exonerated from complying.
Obviously, this promise was long ago conveniently forgotten and a reversal of authority has transpired. This has not happened without the collusion and the complicity of the various parts of the government – even the ones that were supposed to protect the States,as provided in the Constitution. The Supreme Court, Congress and the many Presidents – (not just the current one)- have been more than willing to nullify the Constitution. When the States have been pitted against the mother ship, we should not be surprised that the Supreme Court has backed the Death Star. The latest Supreme Court decision is just one on a long list of failures to reign in the federal government.
Therefore, we need to spend less time worrying about whether the media or the Congress or the President, or the Supreme Court will agree with the concept of the States employing nullification as a push back tool. They won’t. We should not expect any of these groups to all of a sudden see the light and become repentant; just the opposite in fact. When a spoiled child receives the news he is no longer in charge of the household, there are sure to be tantrums.Details
The Congressional Budget Office’s score of the farm bill passed in the Senate estimates that it would save $23 billion (versus the current baseline) over ten years. It’s score of the bill that came out of the House Agriculture Committee estimates savings of $35 billion. However, the previous three farm bills ended up costing more than the CBO originally…Details
In my exchange with Dean Clancy, I presented (in the comments section) a few of the initial problems that opponents of the compact theory of the Union (which holds that the Union was created by the sovereign peoples of the states) have to confront. The nationalist view, by contrast, holds that the Union was created by a singular…Details
by Jack Hunter
My Charleston City Paper column from March 31, 2010:
With its recent passage, Obamacare has quickly become to the Right what the Iraq war was to the Left — a disastrous and costly mistake heralding unprecedented government action, expansion, and intrusion into the lives of American citizens. Conservatives consider forcing Americans to purchase health insurance every bit as unconstitutional as liberals once considered the Patriot Act.
Needless to say, any time massive, sweeping government action occurs, those who protest the loudest are usually those who Washington leaders ignore the most. But a number of states are refusing to be ignored.
As of this writing, 14 states have filed lawsuits against the federal government, declaring Obamacare to be in violation of the 10th amendment. Said S.C. Attorney General Henry McMaster, “A legal challenge by the states appears to be the only hope of protecting the American people from this unprecedented attack on our system of government.”
But what is “our system of government?” Today, strict constitutionalists who still adhere to the explicit letter of the law of our nation’s founding document are few. Those who still agree with James Madison, who wrote that the “powers delegated” to the federal government are “few and defined,” while those of the states are “numerous and indefinite,” have been outnumbered and out-lawyered by generations of politicians and judges who have magically discovered new and virtually limitless federal powers, rendering the rights of the states less numerous and more finite than ever.Details
With respect to the Supreme Court’s ruling on National Health Care, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that the court majority “regards its statutory interpretation as modest. It is not.” Then, noticeably disturbed by the ruling, added. “It amounts to a vast judicial overreaching. It creates a debilitated, inoperable version of health care regulation that Congress did not enact and the public does not expect.” He called it “judicial legislation” and accused Chief Justice John Roberts of trying to “force on the nation a new act.”
Judicial activism is when a law of Congress is interpreted by the Supreme Court in such a way as to give it new meaning. George Washington warned us in his Farewell Address of the inclination of government to do so. “Let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.” Usurpation, in his day meant twisting things around to extract meaning that was initially not there.
So, what did Justice Roberts twist or legislate that changed the National Affordable Healthcare Act (Obamacare) as passed by Congress? At the top of the list, his rewrite called it a tax when Congress never passed it as a tax, and the political party passing it, along with their President, Barack Obama, emphatically resisted any description of it as such. Rich Lowry, a political commentator, said it best. “Obamacare as passed by Congress had a mandate to buy health insurance and a penalty for failing to comply.Details
Texas Governor Rick Perry announced last week that he will not comply with Obamacare; he refuses to expand Medicaid and will not establish a state-run health insurance market exchange.
Rick Perry is grandstanding because he has failed to protect Texans from the threat of the new IRS enforced “tax” against people who decline Obamacare.
Oklahoma State Representative Mike Ritz plans to introduce legislation that does protect the states’ citizens because it authorizes Oklahoma’s Attorney General to defend citizens who fail to purchase insurance against the federal government, and it criminalizes enforcement of the individual mandate.
The proposed Oklahoma bill is based on model legislation from the Tenth Amendment Center, the ‘Federal Health Care Nullification Act’.
Although Bilderberger Rick Perry pretends to be a conservative and constitutionalist, his opposition to Obamacare is a lightweight effort that fails to protect individuals.
Nonetheless, it is still helpful in the movement to nullify Obamacare. If states refuse to set up insurance market exchanges, the federal government says it will implement the insurance exchange for them. However, Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center said, “if the federal government had the resources to do this in the first place, states wouldn’t even be part of the equation. It is unlikely that that the feds have the funding to do this, and they’ll need the complicity of the states to pull it off.”
Perry’s weak refusal is a step in the right direction, but it doesn’t go far enough because the people will still be subject to IRS tax penalties and massive new taxes that will be required to fund the Obamacare monstrosity.Details
The Founders of our country established a republic, and many warned of the natural tendency of a central government to grow in size, scope, and power, at the expense of individual liberty. Well, it’s been 236 years, but here we are.
Readers at the middle-age, or well-done stages of life, will remember a time when you didn’t have to think about the federal government, and its laws that concern the activities your mom used to nag you about as a kid. In fact, you probably trip over several felonies simply by going about your daily routine as a responsible adult.
The Anti-Federalists lost the argument about whether or not to establish a central government in the 1780s , but the 236 years since proved them right. Here’s what they had to say:
The Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, has nothing to do with health, or medical care. It’s about power–power over every aspect of your life: your diet, your activities, where you live, and yes, if you live, when you’re unfortunate enough to get sick.Details
The California Senate’s recent vote to authorize $8 billion for the first segment of a widely panned plan for high-speed rail is another example of why the state remains on fiscal suicide watch. And because federal taxpayers are on the hook for $3.2 billion of the plan’s cost, it’s another example of why the federal government should not be subsidizing rail projects.
If California’s voters and the officials they elect want to blow the state’s taxpayers’ money on high-speed rail, then so be it. But taxpayers in the other 49 states shouldn’t be on the hook. Likewise, Californians shouldn’t have to subsidize rail projects in the other 49 states. Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation acts like a money laundering operation: money taken from each state’s taxpayers goes to Washington, gets “washed” on Capitol Hill, and then gets sent back to the states (minus a cut for the bureaucracy) as directed by the Beltway bosses.
Take, for example, Rep. Don Young’s (R-AK) “railroad to nowhere,” which was featured on Politico last week:Details