This article, AGs: States’ Sovereignty Advances Liberty, captures a strategy for working through the system and its structure. It’s about Stage AG offices using their powers to help thwart federal advances. Here’s an excerpt:
The Center for Individual Freedom’s “State Sovereignty Project” is being planted in soil already made fertile by resolute actions of conservative state attorneys general. The antiquated term of “states’ rights” doesn’t do justice to their efforts, because they really are defending the states’ ability to look out for their citizens’ individual rights, prerogatives and well-being.
Consider Scott Pruitt of Oklahoma. So dedicated is he to the principle of “federalism” – the vertical diffusion of power allowing the states on some subjects to limit the dangerous centralizing power of the federal government – that he has assigned a team of attorneys to a separate “office of federalism” devoted exclusively to fighting abuses by the feds. Within two months, his team was fighting expensive, overly burdensome, bureaucratic meddling with small community banks, without proper rulemaking authority, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Due to Pruitt’s efforts, the FDIC backed down.
On another front, Pruitt has taken the lead in fighting “regulation by litigation” – a practice by which outside activist groups file apparently pre-arranged lawsuits against the Environmental Protection Agency. Quite amazingly, the EPA then enters a “consent decree” with a court within a single day, granting the activists what they wanted and binding multiple states to expensive restrictions without ever letting the states have a chance even to comment on what amounts to a new federal rule. Going through the normal rule-making process, open to public comment and review, might take years; this way, the EPA does it overnight without benefit of sunlight or procedural fairness.
This is another weapon in the fight for liberty and freedom, as defined in the US. Constitution and most individual State constitutions, defending, protecting the “blessing of liberty.” There is or should be little question in anyone’s minds that the America Revolution was NOT to beat one tyrannical government and set up another, but to defend the newly found way of life, the ‘blessings of liberty’ found in America.
So, here we have Attorney Generals (AGs) of the several states taking a stand for the “are defending the states’ ability to look out for their citizens’ individual rights, prerogatives and well-being.” The article states that it is conservative AGs, but I suggest it is the underlying humanity of the issue that matters, and not their political affiliation.
Here I would like to introduce the tool of the Smallest Political Quiz. Using the dimension of personal and economic spheres; the focus is on the individual. Taking that further, the creator “The central insight of the political model promoted by the Quiz is that the major difference between the various political philosophies, the real defining element in what a person believes politically, is the amount of government control over human action. In other words, there’s not just a left-right axis, but an up-down one – DOWN toward authoritarianism and UP toward liberty!”
That dove-tails with TAC and our focus on returning to the individual, via the more applicable political city-state idea, the individual State as exists in America, the ability of the individuals living there to live free and in liberty, in free association, free trade and market, under the rule of law (not Man) with limited statutory laws trying to legislate morality! (My own definition of ‘blessings of liberty,’ not a full definition but an unfolding idea of what it means to me.)
The Center for Individual Freedom’s “State Sovereignty Project” is an example of using the state’s own apparatus, the AG’s office, to take a stand. That one or more AG’s, Ok and Tx as examples, are taking a stand for returning States to their role for advancing the liberty of individuals living in their jurisdiction is truly commendable.
In one state, the AG “has assigned a team of attorneys to a separate “office of federalism” devoted exclusively to fighting abuses by the feds. ” This is an excellent actionable step, a growing awareness raising enterprise.
Texas AG Abbott said it well, “State attorneys general have proven to be the last line of defense against a federal government that is growing too large, spending too much, and reaching too deeply into our lives.”
The AG’s office is the tip of the State’s Sword to stop federal aggression into the State. Constitutionalists can support these efforts by finding ways to inform, support and make them known. While it is far from a silver bullet, it’s a good first step towards protecting individuals from being invaded personally or economically by a federal government seeking to command and control our lives, our fortunes and our way of life!
Latest posts by Noel Berge (see all)
- Nulllification can lead to a State Economic and Prosperity Plan - March 14, 2013
- State’s Rights Chrestomathy & Entropy of federal programs - December 26, 2012
- UN Warns States not to legalize Marijuana. Say WHAT?! - November 27, 2012