States’ Rights Update: Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee; Montana Commentary; Abolish State Government?by Phil on 05/5/2009
TheOhioRepublic blog is reporting:
Senators Keith Faber (R-Celina) and Timothy Grendell (R-Chesterland) will introduce a State sovereignty resolution Wednesday. While modeled on Oklahoma’s, it contains language that has never appeared in another State.
One of the most interesting paragraphs effectively addresses the media assertion that the resolution is “secessionist”: “… We believe in the importance of all levels of government working together to serve the citizens of our country, by respecting the constitutional provisions that properly delineate the authority of federal state, and local governments.”
It includes a reference to Printz v. United States/Mack v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997), in addition to the more commonr reference to New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992). The resolution also quotes James Madison in the Federalist Papers Nos. 39 and 51.
See the link for the full text of the bill.
Oklahoma’s House Concurrent Resolution 1028, authored by State Rep. Charles Key, passed the Oklahoma House [5/4/09]. The vote was 73-22 with 6 not voting.
This concurrent resolution now goes to the State Senate where a simple majority is required to pass it; since this bill is not an act — and therefore doesn’t carry the same weight as creating law — it will not require the Governor to sign it.
On May 4th, the Tennessee State Senate voted unanimously in support of Senate Joint Resolution 311 (31 yay – 0 nay). The resolution, sponsored by Senator Randy McNally, is designed to send Congress a message that the federal government has overstepped its Constitutional bounds by mandating a massive amount of federal policies upon the states in violation of the 10th Amendment.
The resolution now awaits transmittal to the House.
Speaking of, HJR108 is currently sitting in the House Judiciary Committee with a recommendation to pass in the House.
After having heard that the Montanan Governor signed into law a bill that would deny the federal government any kind of restrictions vis-a-vis the 2nd Amendment for all weapons and ammunition made and used intrastate, the PostScripts blog had the following intriguing commentary (originally quoted soucre: PanamaLaw.org):
Executive Summary – The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.
The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.
Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face.
Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. But, since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA? …
There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.
Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not. [emphasis original]>
A government reform group that has targeted incumbents in the past, is pressing to remove them all from New York State Government, and reform the state with a new constitution.”Our ultimate goal, is in May of next year to give people the ultimate opportunity to remove every judge and legislator in the state,” says Leonard Roberto, a semi-regular candidate and the founder of Primary Challenge, an anti-incumbent group.
“Sadly, the truth is, that of the many State elected officials, precious few actually work on behalf of their constituents, but rather have made a practice of consuming our personal wealth, violating our liberties and ignoring our will for their personal gain,” Roberto said in a statement delivered outside Buffalo City Hall.
Roberto’s group is using the petition process to get the reform measure on the ballot next year, and hopes to establish an interim government run by the county executives in each county.
A current listing of State-based initiatives can be found here.