2 new bills in TN.

[Guest jackdog]

I t would appear that Tennessee is in some good company

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Firestorm-Brewing-Between-by-Lance-L-Landon-090217-130.html

February 19, 2009 at 23:23:27

Firestorm Brewing Between U.S. States and Federal Government

by Lance L.

Landon

www.opednews.com

States May Be Getting Ready To Dissolve Our Federal Government

Could this be an ominous shadow drawing on the end of the United States

of America? For years the Federal Government has presumed to be the

all-powerful force governing our country, but it just could be that the

Federal Government only exists at the pleasure of the state governments

and the citizens thereof. States declaring sovereignty sounds like an act

of secession and revolution. However the federal government can

apparently be dissolved and another one formed anew at the discretion of

the states. The existing Federal government may not leave willingly like

so many European governments that are replaced routinely and it may

engage a military effort with our own soldiers or the likes of a Black

Water illegal military invasion to retain total control over us.

United States Federal Government laws are often in violation of the Tenth

Amendment, which is perturbing, these events. This is predicated on an

earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation, which states that,

“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every

power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation [now

Federation] expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress

assembled.”

A growing number of states are declaring their sovereignty afforded under

the U S Constitution’s Tenth Amendment however the conventional news

media are not telling you about what is happening. The State of

Washington on Wednesday - 11 February 2009 and most recently, New

Hampshire [2009], Montana [2009], Hawaii [2009], Michigan [2009],

Missouri [2009], Arizona [2008], Oklahoma [2008], Georgia [1996], and

California [1994] all of which have introduced bills and resolutions

declaring and reaffirming their sovereignty. Some other states have done

this in the past but then let the issue go. Additionally, the states of

Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas,

Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering similar measures.

More well may follow, such as Wyoming and Mississippi.

The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which is part of

the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791 and states, “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.” Historically, this was done to reassert the assignment

of the remaining rights to the states and the people of our country if

they were not specifically delegated by our Constitution to the United

States Government. Further, Amendment Nine on the Construction of the

Constitution, Ratified on 15 December 1791 states, “The enumeration in

the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or

disparage others retained by the people.”

The Arizona State Legislature is currently formulating a bill that

declares their state sovereignty. Their bill further asserts their

state’s right during martial law to call back servicemen to protect

Arizona state, "…if the President or any other federal entity

attempts to institute martial law or its equivalent without an official

declaration in one or more of the states without the consent of that

state …” There is more near the end of this article.

A lot of this recent activity has come about due to the reckless demise

of the banking system now and also in memory of the past during the great

depression that fomented during 1929. There is a Russian academic, Igor

Panarin who recently predicted that the United States would break apart

into about six separate regions by 2010. Predictions of similar

persuasion have been made before, rather they are right or not some big

problems may soon ensue.

Much of the presidential character of the cabinet assembled by President

Obama is representative of that of the previous administration. Obama

perhaps is keeping the Adage, “keep your friends close and keep your

enemies even closer.” A disrespect for our so-called leaders is met from

our so-called leaders disrespect for us the citizens of our country.

Should this be the case yet again, this would establish further reason

for the states course of recent action

It may seem ironic that as we have a President from the land of Lincoln,

and one who admires Lincoln, that another civil war could be brewing.

It’s further ironic that states are beginning to fight back. Many

individuals that were imprisoned by Abraham Lincoln for advocating their

free speech on issues of the day. These times may be as exciting and

revolutionary as when our country was beginning. Benjamin Franklin said

something on the order of, “if we do not hang together, we most certainly

will hang separately.” Its also ironic that our revolutionary war was

with Great Britain and that the so-called Federal Reserve Board (The

Banksters) is a corporate instrument of Great Britain, still engorging

itself with our blood, our wealth and our money.

The state sovereignty issue was discussed on late night radio on

Coast-to-Coast AM. Comments reflected by Alex Jones indicate federal

misjurisdiction of its authority that is infringing on state matters and

on individual rights. States formed this federal government and it may be

disempowered by 34 states [2/3rds]. The Federal government may have

disenfranchised itself by making treatise that subvert its powers. As

such the Federal government may already be insolvent even though it’s

still operating. There is mostly Republican, some Democratic and much

nonpartisan sponsorship on recreating state sovereignty to resolve these

issues. Take a look at these links:

click here

and

here.

Strings attached by the federal government to returning state money for

federal programs may be invalid. States are rejecting federal

intervention. Issues at hand involve the National Guard, Posse

Commentates, and FEMA Prisons for events of rebellion [or civil

demonstration] and revolution and a reimposition of the concept of

establishing a North American Union. Take a look at Jerome Corsi’s book,

“The Late Great USA”.

Federal negation of states’ rights is selling us out and is treasonous is

among the repressive efforts against the states. States may dissolve this

federal government. An effort in Missouri to push for sovereignty began

three years ago when Missouri started to revive interest in its

sovereignty. Other issues are 2nd Amendment Rights being taken away and

the institution of civil disobedience, revolution and re-evaluation of

where we want our government to go.

Unfunded mandates are forcing issues that the states will block is just

one of many issues at hand. The Federal Government essentially has

succeeded from our union. PDD-51, part of The National Security and

Homeland Security Presidential Directive, allows for martial law a lot

too easily; this is really not in the best interest of the citizens of

the United States.

The negation of Congressional authority by the Executive branch is

further ammunition for the states to declare their sovereignty. Congress

has become a ceremonial branch of the government with no real power left.

Congress has just given up its power by not reading the legislation it is

being persuaded to pass hurriedly. Nobody in Congress seems to read the

bills they pass. We must educate ourselves or suffer the consequences for

lack of knowledge. Presidents have become front men for wealthier world

powers.

Generally all state resolutions and bills to regain states inherent

rights are a perfectly legitimate concept. While succession could be a

possibility, the dissolution of the entire federal government and the

institution of a new one predicated mostly on our current one is a

distinct possibility.

It has come to the point where the banks are controlling Washington DC

[or, is it the Bilderbergers as part of the new world order?]. Or is it

just the old world order they are trying to recreate? The use of crises

to terrorize us and promote a new world order, based not on what is good

for us, but for them! Any world government that should arise must be

democratic and not arbitrary. Actually, it is still the Old World Order

that the new world order advocates guised in the remains of globalism

misused.

The primary Constitutional responsibilities of the Federal government are

to control our borders, our currency and our military of which they are

abdicating on all of these. Granted there is an enumeration in Article I,

Section 8 of our Constitution providing for eighteen or so in total

responsibilities and rights. Clause 18, considered the expansion or

elastic clause states, “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and

proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other

Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United

States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” The union is already

gone and America has been sold out to foreign banks. States have the

right to dissolve the federal government in order to reconstitute it.

There is a non-democratic globalist effort that is stealthily moving

ahead with its plan for a world government and economy made in their

image, not ours.

The Constitutional principle in the Tenth Amendment is reflective of

Federalism in that by providing that powers not granted to the National

government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states and to

the people. In the Articles of Confederation, a precursor to our Federal

Government today, "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and

independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by

this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress

assembled."

Once our Constitution was ratified, many desired the addition of a

similar amendment limiting the Federal government to powers to those

"expressly" delegated; this would have denied the use of

implied powers. These powers result under the Elastic Clause the

Constitution. Those implied powers are powers not given to the government

directly through the Constitution, but are considered to be implied in

Section Eight of our Constitution.

This document lets the government create Legislation and laws they

considered necessary and proper so that they may remain in force, to meet

as then or in the future unanticipated applications of the Constitution.

The word "expressly" did not appear in the final version of the

Tenth Amendment as it then was ratified.

Some state representatives on late night radio Coast to Coast AM were

Matt Shea - WA, Jim Guest - MO, Dan Itse - NH, & Charles Key – OK

provided a range of views on this subject.

Click here.

In response to increasing federal encroachment, a growing number of

states have passed and proposed resolutions to assert the Tenth Amendment

and the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.

The Declaration Of Independence states: "Governments are instituted

among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends,

it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute

new Government"

A new vision for America is in the works. This is not just about state

sovereignty, but America’s Sovereignty. We will be rebuilding America in

the image we want, not what outsiders want. We are not ending America,

but providing it a new beginning.

Here in are some of the resolutions and portions thereof:

A small portion from the resolution in Arizona created in 2009: “Be it

resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the

Senate concurring, that:

1. That the State of Arizona 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.

2. That this Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal

government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately,

mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated

powers.

3. That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to

comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or

requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited

or repealed.”

~~~

Each state’s resolution has some language that is about the same but also

has more to say in many cases. The California Resolution initiated in

1994 reads thusly,

“WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

reads as follows:

"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"; and

WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment defines the total scope of

federal power as being that specifically granted by the United States

Constitution and no more; and

WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the 10th Amendment

means that the federal government was created by the states specifically

to be an agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, In the year 1994, the states are demonstrably

treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Numerous resolutions have been forwarded to the

federal government by the California Legislature without any response or

result from Congress or the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Many federal mandates are directly in violation of

the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New

York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not

simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states;

and

WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations

and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress

may further violate the United States Constitution; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and Assembly of the State of

California, jointly, That the State of California hereby claims

sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United

States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the

federal government by the United States Constitution and that this

measure shall serve as notice and demand to the federal government to

cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the

scope of its constitutionally delegated powers; and be it

further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies

of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the United

States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the

President pro Tempore of the United States Senate, each Senator and

Representative from California in the Congress of the United States and

to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state

legislature in the United States of America.”

~~~

While each State Resolution and/or Bill is written somewhat differently

but expresses much of the same determination. New Hampshire has a rather

interesting and long dissertation in its resolution, excerpted here are

some poignant points,

“That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of

the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the

Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not

delegated to the government of United States of America by the

Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to

diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens

shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United

States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts

which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the

States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the

legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a

draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to,

incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons

under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to,

incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation

or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of

political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the

press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including

prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or

Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the

United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall

revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the

United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of

the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America

and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a

government . . .”

[Guest Liberty Seeker]

It's too bad all our state house's seem to have proposed are resolutions and not bill's.

[Guest HexHead]

Could or would this cause the union of the states to break apart, kinda like what we have seen in Russia?

Then what?

Best thing that could possibly happen to us. For starters, we won't have to care what CA thinks about anything.

[Fallguy]

It's too bad all our state house's seem to have proposed are resolutions and not bill's.

Well that's all they can do isn't it? I mean they can't pass a law that will be added to the T.C.A. about this.

Resolutions do mean something, right? It was a resolution that made Nafieh Speaker Emiritus.....

[Guest Liberty Seeker]

Well yeah, I guess he should be an Honorary...

I'm glad they did a resolution, it just seems somehow it's not enough, you know. It is more than a bunch of other have done so...

I guess we take what we can get and hope for more later.

[Guest jackdog]

If the several states involved in these resolutions band together, and demand a total return to our original constitutional government via a new continental congress. It would be a quiet exchange of government. The current federal government would have no standing as long as a required majority of the states stood together. This could be the greatest thing to happen in this nation since the founding of our government.

Think about it. what recourse would the federal government have. if this happens.

None at least not under the US Constitution. They would have to allow foreign troops on US soil if they chose to fight. Remember the military oath is To the Constitution.

So I can't see our current brave Ladies and gents staying loyal to what has become a disloyal government.

[Guest HexHead]

They would have to allow foreign troops on US soil if they chose to fight. Remember the military oath is To the Constitution.

So I can't see our current brave Ladies and gents staying loyal to what has become a disloyal government.

HAHAHAHA, I can just see those blue helmeted UN troops now.

Bring 'em on.

[Guest jackdog]

The Constitution is a contract between the States, and it gives powers to the Federal Government, right? Now, with these Ninth and Tenth Amendment bills being proposed declaring individual state sovereignty. Could or would this cause the union of the states to break apart, kinda like what we have seen in Russia?

Then what?

Why would you assume that they would have to break apart? Why would these states not just reaffirm the entire constitution and start our nation over again based on these laws. Laws that are unconstitutional would or could simply be voided. We would still be one nation made up all 50 of great states under strict constitutional law. This all good be handled by new continental congress and the broken

abortion of our existing federal government could be lawfully removed. with out a war or a shot being fired.

[Guest VolMickey]

Why would you assume that they would have to break apart? Why would these states not just reaffirm the entire constitution and start our nation over again based on these laws. Laws that are unconstitutional would or could simply be voided. We would still be one nation made up all 50 of great states under strict constitutional law. This all good be handled by new continental congress and the broken

abortion of our existing federal government could be lawfully removed. with out a war or a shot being fired.

[NuTcAsE]

Why would you assume that they would have to break apart? Why would these states not just reaffirm the entire constitution and start our nation over again based on these laws. Laws that are unconstitutional would or could simply be voided. We would still be one nation made up all 50 of great states under strict constitutional law. This all good be handled by new continental congress and the broken

abortion of our existing federal government could be lawfully removed. with out a war or a shot being fired.

Not assuming anything, just posing some questions. Here are some more. Why would the states need to pass a bill for something they already have? We are going to re-affirm something that has already been affirmed. Sounds a lot like ummm....... government don't it? Why haven't the states asserted their powers before now? Where have we (myself included) been? Why would anyone assume that it will happen with the new bills? What "IF" a third Continental Congress was convened, how could anyone assume that a new constitution wouldn't give the federal government all the powers over the states? Yeah, people like us would expect the right thing to be done, but, could you guarantee it to happen? If one were to believe Alex Jones, he, himself said last week "We don't want a new Con-Con...". Now, let's say for a moment that he was dead right on everything, would it not be easier to divide and conquer the U.S.? Get each state to declare it's independence, then create conflict between them, call a Continental Congress write a new constitution, there ya go New World Order.

LOL!, conspiracy theories from conspiracy theories! Tin foil hat and drawers I got the ensemble .

I'm not trying to argumentative or presumptuous. Do I think that the Federal Government is and has been out of it's constitutional limits?, Yes. Do I think something needs to be done?, Yep. Is this the way to do it? I don't know yet, I'm just playing the Devil's Advocate........

[Guest jackdog]

Nut Case you bring valid points in your argument. Please bear in mind that pressing the tenth amendment issues was what started the civil war. As someone correctly posted it was not about slavery but the price of cotton and states rights. After that war ended the federal government became more emboldened, to force there will on the states and the result of that is why our government is totally out of control Today.

I would argue that state and individual rights as set forth by the original constitution has long been out of existence. So the states are reaffirming there states rights as a notice to our out of control federal government.

The bills from the several states doing this are telling the federal government that the states want there 10 amendment rights fully reinstated. None of the state resolutions I have seen even hint at changing the US constitution as originally written. I would see a new continental congress as a binding together of these states to merely go back to the rule of law as agreed to under the confines of the original constitution. Not saying your are incorrect or that I'm correct.

I merely think that the states would not want to rewrite the constitution at this time nor do I think the people in these state would tolerate it. Remember these rights are individual rights as well. I think the states also realize that to divide up the Republic of the united states would be suicidal. We have all seen that the break up of the USSR has left the smaller countries at mercy of mother Russia. I would hope that we are smarter and better than that.

The only alternative is do nothing and remain A slave to the political elite that resides in Washington. What if anything will be left of our constitution at the end of the next four years?