We Americans are expected to play by the rules — to obey traffic regulations, pay taxes, observe zoning ordinances — in short, to abide by the law. If we don’t, we may find ourselves fined or even jailed. Our federal government is also expected to abide by rules — in its case, the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution specifies which powers the federal government may exercise, and forbids any others. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution is explicit: “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.”

Many of America’s Founding Fathers were concerned that if the federal government were too powerful, it would become tyrannical. For this reason, many checks and balances were put on the federal government’s power. One of these was that Washington should be restrained by the powers of the states, which would retain a high degree of sovereignty.

James Madison, known as “the father of the Constitution,” said in The Federalist, No. 45: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

The issue of state versus federal power simmered in the 19th century, as in the “nullification crisis” during Andrew Jackson’s presidency, when South Carolina attempted to void, within the state, federally mandated tariffs. That battle ended in a compromise, but the friction between the states and Washington continued to grow. Things came to a head, of course, in the Civil War, when Southern states attempted to secede from the Union.

With the Union’s victory, state sovereignty was largely negated, and federal power has grown exponentially ever since. Creation of the Federal Reserve; the fighting of undeclared wars; Social Security; the building of massive bureaucracies that regulate food, drugs, the environment, energy, etc.; the nationwide enforcement of abortion and prohibition of school prayer; the issuing of “presidential directives” — these are just a few examples of how the federal government has overstepped its bounds, assuming powers not permitted by the Constitution.

The States to the Rescue

However, a new campaign called the Tenth Amendment Movement is now sweeping state legislatures across the nation. This is not an effort by the states to secede from the Union, but an attempt to persuade the federal government to abide by the Constitution.

Leading the charge is Oklahoma. On February 18, its House of Representatives passed House Joint Resolution 1003 by a vote of 83 to 13, resolving “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.” HJR 1003 also states “that this 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.” It directs that copies of the resolution be distributed to, among others, the president of the United States, the president of the U.S. Senate, and the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Oklahoma State Representative Charles Key, the resolution’s sponsor, was largely prompted to act by two unconstitutional federal steps — the pending Real ID Act, which would compel Americans to have a national ID card (threatening our privacy and moving us closer to a surveillance state), and the No Child Left Behind Act, a completely unconstitutional intrusion of the federal government into education. Key has said, “The more we stand by and watch the federal government get involved in areas where it has no legal authority, we kill the Constitution a little at a time. The last few decades, the Constitution has been hanging by a thread.” He told The New American: “All of us have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. And the Constitution either means what it says or it means nothing.”

On March 4, the Oklahoma Senate passed SJR 10, a resolution with identical wording to HJR 1003, affirming Oklahoma’s intent to uphold the 10th Amendment. Introduced by Senator Randy Brogdon, it passed by a vote of 25 to 17. However, because SJR 10 and HJR 1003 are technically viewed as two different bills despite the identical wording, the House and Senate bills must still be formally reconciled and passed, and signed by Governor Brad Henry, to become official. But bilateral passage of the resolutions is a significant achievement.

Senator Brogdon told The New American: “Over the last few weeks, it had become clear that the U.S. Congress was financially breaking the backs of every citizen in the country. So many of the problems our country faces would be resolved if the federal government was restricted to its constitutional powers. I have been burdened to do what is best for our nation and bring it back to its founding principles. My concern is for the future of my kids and grandkids; it’s a deep-seated feeling. The state legislature is a place of interposition — we are supposed to protect the people.”

A huge factor in the Oklahoma success story has been the role of grass-roots activists lobbying their legislators to act. And perhaps even transcending this has been the importance of getting the right legislators elected. In 2008, despite the Democratic tide sweeping the nation, Republicans gained control of the Oklahoma Senate for the first time in a century. Over the last five election cycles, the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee, a PAC chaired by Charlie Meadows, has raised over $100,000 for 72 candidates for the state legislature. “When we interview a candidate,” Meadows explained to The New American, “we look at his core values; we look for constitutionalists, not just Republicans; and we look for people who have a passion to make a difference. Once such people are in office, they can be trusted to act on their own.”

The States: Getting “Fed” Up

The efforts of the states to reassert their constitutional authority did not begin with the Tenth Amendment Movement. There had already been widespread opposition to the Real ID Act, with 20 states passing resolutions opposing its implementation. A battle has also erupted in some state legislatures over the renewed call for a Constitutional Convention. Such a convention, which must be approved by two-thirds of the state legislatures, has been sold as a way to balance the federal budget or define marriage in a traditional way. However, there has been no constitutional convention since 1787. Once underway, it could get completely out of control. Former Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg warned: “There is no enforceable mechanism to prevent a convention from reporting out wholesale changes to our Constitution and Bill of Rights.” On March 4, the resilient Oklahoma Senate, by a vote of 45 to 0, rescinded its previous calls for a Constitutional Convention.

Though the major media remain silent about it, the Tenth Amendment Movement has now caught fire. On March 5, South Dakota became the second state in the nation to have both its House and Senate pass Tenth Amendment resolutions. Similar resolutions are under consideration by many other states. For the status of Tenth Amendment resolutions in state legislatures, visit www.JBS.org/freedom and click on “The Tenth Amendment Movement.” You’ll also find links for sending e-mails to your state legislators in support of the Tenth Amendment Movement.

A spark plug for the movement has been outrage over the federal government’s $700 billion bailout of the financial industry and $17 billion bailout of the auto industry.

One barrier for some state legislators will be that, if they support such a resolution, they might face retribution in the form of funding cuts from Washington. But it was precisely through the bait of such handouts that the federal government has secured so much of its unconstitutional authority.

Some may complain that the Tenth Amendment resolutions are only expressions of opinion with no real teeth — i.e., they do not specifically repeal or block unconstitutional federal laws.

However, many a great achievement began with an idea. The Declaration of Independence, in dissolving ties with Great Britain, spent much of its prose on statements of principle, and did nothing to establish a new government. Yet in its wake came widening revolution, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution that established the greatest nation on Earth.

The Tenth Amendment Movement has the potential to grow in the same way. In an interview with The New American, Oklahoma Representative Charles Key compared it to the actions of a landlord that faces a tenant who is not paying rent and is otherwise violating his contract. The landlord starts by serving a notice to the tenant. If the tenant ignores the notice, the landlord begins to take more concrete actions. It will be the same with the Tenth Amendment resolutions, says Key, if the federal government fails to heed the states. One step envisioned — and already in early planning stages — is for legislators from various states to meet to plan concerted action.

For more information about the Tenth Amendment Movement, click here.

Photo of Oklahoma State Rep. Charles Key: Oklahoma Legislative Service Bureau
 
 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (10)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Face facts about an Article V convention, Lowly rated comment [Show]

Steve in AL said:

Giving it some teeth After passing a statement of principle, I think a state could give teeth by selecting some source of federal funding to the state that has strings attached. Go ahead and take the money (after all, your citizens have already paid for it) and just don't comply with the federally-mandated controls. Take it to court to force the issue - find out if a federal court will abide by the Constitution and rule of law. A state doesn't even need to choose a large dollar area of funding that might hurt it's citizens. Just pick a small federal fund that comes back to the state with strings on it. Of course, if we find that the federal judiciary won't honor the Constitution, what then?

March 16, 2009

Patrick Henry said:

Patriot 'When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.' Thomas Jefferson REVOLUTION is the Solution!!! 'God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.' - Thomas Jefferson, in letter to William S. Smith, 1787

March 17, 2009 | url

bopp said:

it is all contract/commerce Steve...you idea won't work because the federal $ is given to the states under contract...it has nothing to do with the constitution (unfortunately). The states have the right to refuse the $. They know its unconstitutional...that makes them a accessory to the crime. If they want real change the states will have to give the feds the finger and refuse the money...and there are many good ways to do that...such as revoke the irs corporate status to operate in their state. The IRS has to be registered with the secretary of state to operate as a corporation is that state...revoke their ability! That would sent a pretty clear message.

March 17, 2009

Ken said:

good call bopp I think that is the best idea yet. The states have to find some reason, some violation, and then use it to revoke the IRS's business license to operate within the state. Brilliant.

March 17, 2009

Buck said:

HERE'S YOUR VIOLATION, KEN !!! Hey, Ken, how about "robbery"??? The Federal Reserve and the I.R.S. have been robbing Amerikans blind since 1913 and 1914 respectively!!! * IRS Form 1040 violates the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and is therefore a legally invalid form. * Under the Public Protection clause of the PRA, no person can be penalized for failing to file a 1040 if the IRS fails to fully comply with the PRA. * The PRA statutes explicitly provide that a PRA challenge is a complete defense and can be raised in any administrative or judicial proceeding. * The IRS Individual Form 1040 has not and cannot comply with the requirements of the PRA because no existing statute authorizes the IRS to impose or collect the federal income tax from individuals. That lack of bona fide authority makes it impossible for the IRS to avoid violating the PRA. Have a nice April 15!!!

March 18, 2009

Lee said:

Buck-ing the system thru the courts Yea, that's real smart buck the system by spending endless hours fighting the system thru the courts. Take yourself out of the fight for freedom by being sent to jail despite "crackin' the code." What is it with misspelling America?

March 18, 2009

Shawny said:

... I must be getting old......it seems like the old Republican party I knew growing up has shifted so far to the left (can't even really call it moderate) that it's difficult sorting them out from the Democrats anymore. And the voices that sound most like they used to are Libertarian voices who folks thought were radical extremists back in the 70's. Maybe the American people have gotten so used to losing rights on a daily basis and continuing to be apathetic so long that it's normal now. If you dumb down the populace enough that they don't know what their rights are, fewer are likely to stand up and try to defend them whatever their beliefs. I'd really like for people, whatever "brand" they want to sign on with, to stand up and at least fight for it, quit being lead around by their government and the media, being told what to think and believe. I think this administration is going directly and swiftly in the wrong direction, do not pass go, do not collect 200.00. But I never used to feel as unempowered to change things as I do now. And now I think it may take some more radically new thinking and action to change what's already been "changed" for the worse. I don't think the American People have time to wait for that white knight to show up and lead the Republican party. I remember when the conservative movement didn't call themselves "underground" anything. That sounds too much like Jews escaping Nazi's, slaves escaping slave owners and folks hiding out to read their Bible. If that's where we've gotten it's time for some very strong message to both our state and federal governments. I'm in the state of Washington and avidly supporting the 10th Amendment movement but it's a Democratic majority here and if we can't even get it though the House and Senate here then there's gotta be a snowball in hells chance on the Hill. This movement needs some teeth and the grassroots need to get a lot more vocal.

March 21, 2009

Kilgore 4 TX Governor said:

... Texas and the other seceding states will be friendlier to the USA leaders after separation. Because the USA won't be able to spend our money anymore. Freedom!!!

March 30, 2009 | url

Charles Henry said:

Randy Brogden for Governor of The Great State of Oklahoma! ...and if that doesn't work out, I want Shawny "...stand up and at least fight for it," on my flank.

March 31, 2009