by Justin D. Lowry, Georgia Conservative Weekly
There comes a time in a nation’s course when the citizenry must question its government’s intentions. When we elect our officials, we hire them for their term; therefore, as they represent us, they should listen to us. There is a problem with a citizenry that allows its government to do their thinking for them. There is also a problem with a government that believes it knows what is best for the citizenry.
This government has the belief that the populace is too stupid, lazy, or indifferent to take care of themselves. The populace has a belief that since they elected them, they know better than they do, thus should take care of them. A free people cannot be free with both of these beliefs.
Take TARP for example. Several citizens spoke out against this. Petitions circulated, protests were organized, and contact with our officials was made, yet they went largely ignored. In addition, this is supposed to be the “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.â€
The sovereignty of a state is needed, as these officials cannot dictate what is right for everyone. What is right for the Carolinas may not be what is best for Montana or Ohio. When a state has the sovereignty to determine what it needs, the citizenry is better heard and taken care of. If the Federal intervention is at a minimum, then the people better determine their rights, as a government allows liberty, it is up to the people to declare, define, and defend it.
The sovereignty can be used to defend its citizenry’s liberty. If a state believes the federal government oversteps its bounds, then that state should have the right to declare that act null and void within its boundaries, in accordance with the Constitution. A state should be allowed to use its funds as it sees fit to the funds purpose, and funds should not be offered on a quid pro quo basis, whereas the Federal government refuses funds because a state refuses to pass legislation, for this is a coercive act. The Federal government should not deny funds to a state for Federal programs within the state, nor should they be allowed to force a state to accept a program, unless it is protected by the Constitution. Even then, the state has the right to question if the program is constitutional. Liberty should never be used as political leverage, as this would force the state to choose between what it believes is right for its citizens and funding for programs that the Federal government has installed in a state.
Even as I write this, Oklahoma and New Hampshire are taking actions against the Federal government. Last summer, Oklahoma declared its state sovereignty, and New Hampshire has introduced legislation that claims that if the Federal government oversteps its bound, it will secede from the Union.
Under state sovereignty, every state has the right to establish its own educational, environmental, economical, and social standards.
Every state has the right to take care of its citizenry, as it determines with respect to its relationship with the Constitution.
Every state has the right to determine how to take care of the impoverished, elderly, and retired.
Every state has the right to determine the handling of social issues, id est. definition of marriage, abortion regulations, etc.
Every state has the right to define the separation of church and state on a state and local level, not for Federal property within the state. All land within the borders of the state belongs to the state and citizenry, except for land used by the Federal government.
Every state has the right to use its land as it sees fit without federal intervention, and how to use its resources. A state knows what is best for itself, no the Federal government.
Every state has the right of protection from martial law, whereas, the Federal government cannot declare martial law within a state without the express consent of that state’s legislature.
If the Federal government refuses funds to a state for Federal programs, that state then has the right to abolish that program within the state.
As a state governs itself, the Federal government may make suggestions, but cannot punish a state for not enacting the suggested legislation. No level of government should ever play politics with the people’s liberty. What manner of government of free people use liberty as a bargaining chip? Does this government truly care for the liberty of its citizens of the sovereignty of its states whenever it is willing to disregard them to force the passing of legislation?
This is coming at a time when our Federal government is greatly expanding, as it has gradually done in the past. This is the most radical expansion of our government. Newsweek, on its cover, jovially declared that we are all socialist. This is a struggle for our very way of life.
Lady Liberty is weeping at the condition of our Republic. People mistakenly think that we have Liberty because we have freedom of speech and thought, well what is the good of either when they upon deaf ears? If they ignore the voice of the people, then our state should act as interpreter, as it must be assumed its voice is louder than ours is. If it is a common belief that elected officials are wiser and more knowledgeable than the citizenry is, then it must be believed that 10 “wise†voices should be better heard than 100 “common†voices.
Now is the time for non-violent action. The smoke is on the horizon, the fire is roaring towards us. Either we can let the fire burn the house that Liberty built, or we can prevent the fire from reaching us. Call or write your representatives to express your concern for a declaration of state sovereignty. Educate the masses, tell people what is going on and what needs to be done. Pass this essay along if need-be, use it to educate the masses.