[UPDATE on the Tenth Amendment/State Sovereignty Movement, March 4, "Good News and Bad News for the Tenth Amendment Movement."]

On Wednesday the Oklahoma House of Representatives became the first state legislative body this year to pass a resolution affirming its "sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States." This resolution, HJR1003, was passed by a very large margin, 83 to 13 on February 18. At least another 20 state legislatures are considering similar resolutions. [Update, February 23, 2009: Click here for "The Tenth Amendment Movement: Status by State, 2009," to see which states have already introduced Tenth Amendment resolutions this year along with links to the full-text of each resolution.]

The official summary of HJR1003 reads as follows:

A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed; and directing distribution.

After nine "Whereas" clauses, the resolution concludes with:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE OF THE 1ST SESSION OF THE 52ND OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States....

I've taken pains to quote from HJR1003's official summary and concluding passage to demonstrate that referring to passage of this resolution (and consideration of similar resolutions by another 20 or so states) as being part of a "State Sovereignty Movement" is quite misleading. The expression "state sovereignty movement" implies that this is a movement among the states to secede from the union and become independent nation-states. However, the texts of Oklahoma's HJR1003 and many other similar resolutions under consideration in other states do not confirm this secessionist implication.

Here's the text of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States:

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

It is clear from reading the Ninth and Tenth Amendments and the texts of Oklahoma's and the other states' resolutions that are based on the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, that the intent is simply to restore the balance of powers between the states and the federal government as envisioned by our Founding Fathers when they wrote the Constitution.

This Tenth Amendment Movement, as exemplified by Oklahoma and the consideration of similar resolutions by another 20 or more states, is certainly a most welcome development. As the federal government is rapidly consolidating its usurpation of the powers reserved to the states by the Constitution, we can readily appreciate the benefit of restoring state sovereignty over those powers.

Here's an interesting video of an interview between Glenn Beck and New Hampshire representative Daniel Itse, cosponsor of New Hampshire's HCR6, "A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles":

New Hampshire's HCR6 resolution makes great reading because it's based on Thomas Jefferson's Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, which were an eloquent affirmation of states' rights under the Constitution. This is the document where Jefferson made his famous statement, "In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

Beginning with its founding meeting in 1958, the John Birch Society has been very concerned about the loss of states' rights. At that meeting founder Robert Welch provided a list of ten dangerous trends in our nation. Number seven on this list was:

Far more centralization of power in Washington, and the practical elimination of our state lines. There is a many-faceted drive at work to have our state lines eventually mean no more within the nation than our county lines do now within the states. (The Blue Book of the John Birch Society, Robert Welch, 1959)

Here's a fascinating nine-minute video of excerpts from two speeches given by Robert Welch in 1974. In the first speech you'll hear him quote from his 1958 speech about the ten dangeous trends for the U.S. mentioned above. In the second speech you'll hear his platform for what should be done to preserve freedom in our nation. Listening to this speech over 30 years later, it is amazing just how similar Robert Welch's prescription for America in 1974 is to Ron Paul's campaign platform in 2008.

May this year's Tenth Amendment Movement mark the beginning of the successful restoration of states' rights under the Constitution as envisioned by the Founding Fathers!

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (12)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

Wrong info here, Lowly rated comment [Show]

lgreenley said:

... Dave, sorry about the wrong link being supplied for Oklahoma HJR1003. Now it's corrected. It was passed overwhelmingly on Feb. 18 by 83 to 13. I find the Oklahoma legislative website to be very hard to work with, so I'm not surprised that you haven't been able to verify introduction and passage of HJR1003. I've had to resort to supplementing searches on the OK site with Google searches to find what I want. I knew the resolution had passed because I had been told by people who were there. I should have included in my article above that last week the Oklahoma Senate Judiciary Committee approved SJR10 (the Senate version of HJR1003) to be voted on by the full Senate by a vote of 6-1.

report abuse vote down vote up

February 20, 2009
Votes: +8

lgreenley said:

... Dave, I just noticed I hadn't included a link to the actual vote results for Oklahoma HJR1003 on Feb. 18. So now I've added a link for "passed by a very large margin, 83 to 13 on February 18" in the above article. The link takes you to the official OK legislative webpage that summarizes the vote on HJR1003, gives the date, and lists all voting for and against. You'll find it all appears to be very real.

report abuse vote down vote up

February 20, 2009
Votes: +2

Dave Nalle said:

Irony After posting here I went and did more research and I determined it was easier to get Charles Key's (the sponsor of the bill) cell phone number than it was to get info out of the OK legislature website, so I just called him and got the full scoop, and it does sound pretty promising. Now, I've heard that the bill is also up for consideration in Maine, but their site is even more hard to use than the Oklahoma one. Any info on that? Dave

report abuse vote down vote up

February 20, 2009 | url
Votes: +4

MarkGlen said:

The Feds are not doing their job I agree with the above article. I would like to show where the federal government is falling down on its job: The Second Amendment is clear: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” God established governments to punish crime, but what happens if governments are law-breakers also? For instance: Why should a state government be allowed to require a permit for a person to carry a concealed weapon when the federal Constitution guarantees our right to keep armed? Should federal police arrest state governments for breaking the law of the land? I think so. The federaal Government has been guilty of doing what they shouldn't and not doing what they should.

report abuse vote down vote up

February 20, 2009 | url
Votes: +5

Bob Donohoo said:

	Just the first step... Unfortunately, I fear this is just the first step. Each of us may want to consider how we can prepare our legislatures for more aggressive actions.
	report abuse vote down vote up

February 20, 2009
Votes: +4

Peter Steele said:

RE: Americans for Sovereignty hopefully in Connecticut I filled out a get US out of the UN survey for Americans for Sovereignty hoping that Connecticut legislators get my message. If we throw the UN out of New York City, we won't have any more 9/11s, Socialists, Communists, world government, UN Tax, UN Soldiers, or our guns taken away from us. My late father's Navy will have absolute freedom of the seas with the UN and the LOST out of the way. Connecticut is a Democrat state so I can't get my hopes up too high. But I'm formalizing my membership in the Connecticut Sons of the American Revolution after I formalized my membership in the Mayflower Society. My father's navy born in 1775 says do not tread on me and my father reminded others of that statement as a Republican Conservative of many years standing. BGen Peter F. Steele, USMC [Ret] for RADM Peter Steele, USN.

report abuse vote down vote up

February 22, 2009
Votes: +5

Dave B said:

	Great start! This is a great step to tell the Federal Government to "take a hike". Next we need each state to rebuild it's "State Militia", so we can truly defend ourselves from the Federal Corrupt Communist "1984" Regime.
	report abuse vote down vote up

February 23, 2009
Votes: +5

RichardR369 said:

	Socialist/Communist Government We pass this, and we will get invaded and not a story will be announced in the national news. Oklahoma must be ready. The national guard up north was getting ready to train going door to door looking for weapons. The federal government is anticipating this.
	report abuse vote down vote up

February 24, 2009
Votes: -2

Tinkerman said:

As useless as a fart in a windstorm! Just a buncha hoopla over a totally meaningless gesture from another smoke & mirrors gang. A "resolution" has absolutely NO power what-so-ever under law, it holds no water, it means nothing! It simply proclaims that a few impotent legislators more-or-less agreed on an idea, nothing more. But now the sheeple can go back to sleep, because they "feel" that the critters in the State House really took a stand here! About as useless as a fart in a windstorm!

report abuse vote down vote up

February 26, 2009
Votes: -1

FrankyB said:

	Pithy Lock-and-Load!
	report abuse vote down vote up

February 26, 2009
Votes: +2

mr_bellows said:

	Just Curious Just curious;It would be interesting to know who the 13 were that voted No to Americans re-affirming their rights.
	report abuse vote down vote up

February 26, 2009
Votes: +2