Good News and Bad News for the Tenth Amendment Movement PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Written by Larry Greenley   
Wednesday, 04 March 2009 23:59

The past couple days have brought a real mixed bag of results for the Tenth Amendment Movement, also known as the State Sovereignty Movement.

First, the good news. Earlier today (March 4) the Oklahoma Senate passed a Tenth Amendment resolution (SJR10) by a vote of 25 to 17. Since the Oklahoma House had already passed its Tenth Amendment resolution (HJR1003) on February 18, Oklahoma has the distinction of being the first state where both houses have passed a Tenth Amendment resolution affirming its sovereignty over those powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution. South Dakota became the second state where at least one legislative body has passed a Tenth Amendment bill when its House passed HCR1013 by 51 to 18 on March 3. The other piece of good news came from Idaho where the House State Affairs Committee voted to introduce a Tenth Amendment resolution by a vote of 13 to 4 on March 4.

Now for the bad news. Today New Hampshire's Tenth Amendment bill, HCR6, based on Thomas Jefferson's Kentucky Resolves of 1798, was voted down by 150-216 on March 4. Unfortunately, opponents of HCR6 were able to portray it as a secessionist measure and thereby discredit it. Fortunately, however, New Hampshire's HCR6 was unique in being particularly susceptible to a secessionist interpretation. The rest of the state Tenth Amendment resolutions are almost identical and very clearly only affirm the proper balance between the states and the federal government within the union as prescribed by the Constitution. The other bad news came from Arkansas where a House committee voted down a Tenth Amendment resolution by a vote of 8-10 on March 4. The committee vote was strictly along party lines with the Republicans all favoring the resolution and the Democrats all opposing it.

Click here for a state-by-state status review of Tenth Amendment resolutions. There are now at least 18 states that have introduced Tenth Amendment resolutions, including Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Pennsylvania and several other states are also considering such resolutions.

Click here to conveniently email your state legislators in support of Tenth Amendment resolutions similar to those already being considered in over 20 other states. You'll be supplied with a blank message to your state legislators. Just use the state-by-state status review mentioned above to learn whether your state has already introduced a Tenth Amendment resolution or whether you need to urge your state reps to go ahead and introduce such a resolution. Armed with this knowledge, you can compose an appropriate email to send.

The overriding good news about the Tenth Amendment Movement is that so many citizens and state legislators in so many states are taking some first steps toward restoring the proper balance of power between the states and the federal government as prescribed by the Constitution. Although these Tenth Amendment resolutions are not legally binding, they are steppingstones toward further legislation that would be legally binding. If we are to restore our constitutional Republic, the starting point must be renewed respect for and adherence to the Constitution. Viewed in that light the Tenth Amendment Movement is very good news indeed.

Trackback(0)
Comments (6)Add Comment
0
JLB777
March 05, 2009
64.173.195.252
Votes: +8
...


The state of Nevada is drafting the same resolution and will
come forward this session to affirm our state sovereignty under
the Ninth and Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
With that said, our government representatives have taken an oath
to uphold the US Constitution and their State Constitution.

Denying the passage of this resolution would demonstrate the
disregard of these representatives loyalty to the oath and
the people of this great state.

To the representatives who choose not to support this resolution
could result in your replacement in the next elections.

0
Unkle Buck
March 06, 2009
68.22.199.142
Votes: +3
Article. VI.

This section of the constitution is little read and little understood.Very important
Article. VI.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States

7263
Rex in Alabama
March 07, 2009
72.147.87.83
Votes: +2
Nationwide Web Site for State Sovereignty

I am trying to get a nationwide state sovereignty web site off the ground to coordinate communications and information about state sovereignty efforts in all 50 state capitals. The site is at http://www.statesovereignty.org. There is a new blog and a discussion forum. So far not very many people have registered, but I am trying to post a lot of good information there. If you would join and encourage others to do so as well, it woud help citizens and voters in all 50 states to become educated about their sovereignty and perhaps inspire more of them to contact their own lawmakers to make their desires known.

0
Joy
March 09, 2009
4.156.96.114
Votes: +3
Sovereignty and federal funds

I'm thrilled to see the push to claim state sovereignty, but unless these states eschew federal funding for ANYTHING, their resolutions don't mean a hill of beans. It is states accepting federal funds that got us into this mess, and it will be impossible to claim sovereignty and make it stick without fiscal responsibility, including rejecting the carrot/stick of federal funds, in each state.

7263
Rex in Alabama
March 10, 2009
68.17.188.65
Votes: +3
...

I'd say that it's states accepting the mandates that got us into this mess, rather than "accepting" the money. The money is ours already, and we are entitled to it without strings attached. Ideally, states would be the central taxing authority, and the Federal level of government would have to rely upon states to supply revenues for its operations, rather than the opposite. As it is, the Federal government taxes our money from us wihtout our consent, and gives us only a relatively small portion of it back, with strings attached. Under the 9th and 10th Amendments, we and the states are not bound to obey those strings in order to take the money back that was and is ours first, last, and always.

0
M. J. "Zeb" Blanchard
April 04, 2009
75.91.79.89
Votes: +3
...

The Georgia Senate passed S.R.632 sovereignty based on Jeffersonian principles 43:1 on April 1.
H.R.470 for sovereignty remains in committee.

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.

busy
 
Tweet With Us:

Constitution Blog

Constitution Illustration We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union ... do ordain and establish this Constitution...."

— Preamble U.S. Constitution

Copyright © 2010 - .

Copyright 2010. The John Birch Society | PO Box 8040, Appleton, Wisconsin 54912 | 920-749-3780 | Standing for Family and Freedom | Terms