Comments on: A Joint Invitation to Return to States’ Rights

By: John T

John T — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:17:49 +0000

below is the essence of an email I sent to Minnesotan Rep. Kahn (D) who authored a Bill for lowering the legal age limit for consumption of alcohol in the State of Minnesota:

Dear Ms. Kahn,
I noticed the Federal government response to a rising interest in lowering the legal drinking age limit:
"…Congress, which has decreed that any state with a drinking age below 21 will forfeit 10 percent of its federal highway funds."
Yet another example of Congress usurping the power of the State (indirectly) through blackmail. What has seriously been needed for a long time is to rein in Congress. The Tenth Amendment CLEARLY STATES that all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the States and the People. I just can't, off the top of my head, think of any retaliatory moves that states like Minnesota, Missouri, South Dakota might make. I'm wondering if collectively they might be able to sue the Federal Government on the basis of blackmail or something? Or perhaps abuse of power by interfering where they have no jurisdiction? That it's unconstitutional? I feel that somehow it is illegal to blackmail the States into doing Congress' bidding. This is in fact, what Congress is doing. It's not like Congress said "Well, we need to cut your Federal highway funds because of the budget" or something like that. They're saying "If you don't comply with our wishes we will cut your Federal highway funds." Clearly that's blackmail.

The long and short of it: if you could, take a small bit of time to explain to me how monetary coercion be used legitimately by the Federal government? In other words, in your experience, what is the legal basis and rationale from the Federal government's viewpoint ?
If in fact they can do this: what stops the Fed from interfering with other state laws? where does it end? I've just never understood that !! It's VERY irritating!

Thanks for your attention.

Sincerely,
John R. Townsend

It is not the lowering of the legal age limit that I am concerned with here. But I question the response of the Federal government to laws made by a State in which the Fed finds itself in disagreement. Laws that are clearly out of the bounds of Federal jurisdiction and belong to the State only – and so the Federal government responds with blackmail.
I can't imagine how the States ever let the Federal government get into the superior position where they can exert this sort of coercion in the business of the individual states – where clearly they have no jurisdiction.

By: Dale Zylman

Dale Zylman — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 01:55:04 +0000

Sorry, the site is usa1911.com. My apologies.

By: Dale Zylman

Dale Zylman — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 01:51:57 +0000

I may need to eat crow. My thanks to Rep. Workman for sponsoring a States Rights Resolution in the Fl house. When U.S. Rep. Bill Posey initiated the Town Hall meeting in Melbourne(much thanks, Bill) Rep. Workman received the loudest ovation after mentioning the “States Rights” resolution. Other sites if you’re not familiar: campaignforliberty.com, tenthamendmentcenter.com, 1911usa.com, and so many others. Don’t forget the ACLJ-American Center for Law and Justice. Do your research. I don’t intend to slight anyone, just too many to list(and remember). Don’t forget “Freedom Watch” Wed. at two on Fox Streaming News with Judge Andrew Napolitano whose frequent guest Peter Schiff is making a run for Chris Dodds CT Senate seat. Together we can take back this country! God Bless you all.

By: Skip Bilson

Skip Bilson — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 04:27:56 +0000

Amen, Brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
States rights is what the Civil War was all about. Regardless of the hype President Lincoln put on the situation.

A lot of people have had enough of BIG government!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:29:22 +0000

And, Jim, if it’s going to exist, it needs to be as small in size and scope as possible. That way, if it gets out of hand, it’s easier to “escape”

By: Jim Lunsford

Jim Lunsford — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:05:33 +0000

Awesome idea on the census. Personally, I never give them any data whatsoever. Ignore them completely. Of course, though I would be ecstatic over a return to the Constitution, my actual political leanings are of Anarchy. So, I have absolutely no use for any governmental body whatsoever. However, if we are going to have one, at least make them follow the rules they set down for the rest of us.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:02:20 +0000

May I suggest that states specifically declare that they have not delegated to the federal government the power or authority to require residents to divulge to census information to anyone other than federal employees (thus excluding ACORN and other political advocacy groups), and that such information shall be limited only to that specifically enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. May I suggest that states further make it a state crime for federal agents to claim legal authority to declare any additional information for the purposes of a census without a judicial order based on powers specifically enumerated by the states.

By: NANCYRUSSELL

NANCYRUSSELL — Sat, 23 May 2009 03:03:03 +0000

WHERE CAN I FIND THE BIG WOOOO PROFESSOR’S ARTICLE AND WHO IS THIS PERSON? I WENT TO HAWK’S CAFE AND DIDN’T SEE ANY ARCHIVE THAT MATCHED.

By: Arklight

Arklight — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:32:14 +0000

Nancy Russel:
You might want to go to http://www.hawkscafe.com and check out the archived bulletins. So far as I’ve been able to verify their material, they’ve been spot on. Also, you might want to find a copy of ‘The Antifederalist Papers’, which have, included, the Convention debates, the Consitution, and bushels of other relevant material. For comparing capatalism as it should most nearly resemble in order to be a ‘perpetual engine’, Ayn Rand’s book ‘Capitalism; the unknown ethic’ is an excellent guide, with some rather astonishing contributions by Alan Greenspan before he turned his coat. ‘Capitalism’ is probably the least readable of her works, but well worth the unwavering determination to ‘get through’ it which is required; Ayn Rand’s books warned people for many years of what could happen without the microscope focus on officials, banksters and stock weenies but did anybody listen? Yeah, the people she was warning us against, and they just tweaked their playbook about a half a degree and slid over/under/around the descriptions that would have seen them exposed, at least to those of us who paid attention.
Oh, yeah – - – watch out for this professor what’s-his-name, the new Big WOOOO contributor, read his article very, very carefully. I’ve my own opinion of this guy, but it may be that my nose has become overly delicate from detecting the odour rats through the years. Let me know what ya think, kiddo.

By: NANCYRUSSELL

NANCYRUSSELL — Thu, 21 May 2009 21:46:57 +0000

DAD WAS GASSED A NUMBER OF TIMES AND WHEN HE RETURNED TO THE STATES HE WAS ILL AND DIDN’T KNOW HOW TO FEEL BETTER UNTIL HE WENT TO A HEALTH FOOD RESTAURANT AND WAS CURED EATING SAFE, NUTRITIOUS FOOD. HE WAS A CORPORAL AND TOLD US HE NEVER HAD ANY DOUBT THAT HE WOULD SURVIVE THE WAR AND AS A RACONTEUR HE PIQUED OUR INTEREST WITH HIS MANY AND ENTERTAINING TALES. I MISS HIM.