State of Washington declares sovereignty

[Al Norris]

Originally Posted by El Paso Joe

Especially with the Judicial Review (supposedly) granted by the third amendment.

I'm sure you meant Article III, as the 3rd amendment deals with the quartering of soldiers.

By common law, judicial review was long a power of the judiciary. It is not something granted, rather it is something that was always there. That common law authority was never codified by statute, but under case law: Marbury v. Madison.

[405boy]

Hey guys

I have not been on this site but a couple of months and I have noticed one very important thing, AL aka (Antipitas) is very smart. Al, you should run for office, seriously, we need to start promoting like minded people again for the people. Anyone up for game, I am considering running locally to start.

[Al Norris]

I ran for Mayor of my town, back in 2003. In 2007, I was working for a different company and couldn't take the pay cut (Mayor is paid as a part time job) - they said they would "accommodate" my hours, but refused to put it in writing.

Now I content myself to being a thorn in the side of the current Mayor/Council; Police Chief; Sheriff; and my State and Federal Reps.

ETA: Forgot to mention that I lost by 33 votes.

[kirpi97]

Al, God bless you for making a difference. Even if it is from the sidelines. But I am taken back by the brazen and bold belief that California could actually succeed as a nation if it were to secede. The arguments are compelling, but given the financial problems facing California today, it is highly unlikely Hollywood could pull this off.

First, lets pull out the Federal government completely. This would include all Military bases, the shipyards currently under contract to the federal government, the federal prison guards (you can keep the facilities and the bodies to feed), Customs Inspectors, subsidies to the universities and colleges, etc.

The National Guard itself would have to be significantly ramped up to provide the National Defense of this new country. Think of the cost to secure your border with Mexico--no US military to assist you. And the cost to monitor the entire coastline you brag about. And the inspection all the goods that come into your ports. Drug enforcement?

Now what about the need for Ambassadors and embassies. A new country would need to have visas and passports to travel. Who will regulate this. I know, Arnold would just create more government jobs. While he is creating new government jobs, maybe he could employ more prison guards to replace the Feds.

We haven't even touched the cost for education, medical, and shelter for the homeless, the migrant workers, the unemployed. Just look whose hand is out there the furthest for this so-called "stimulus" bill.

It is moot to think a state, maybe other than Texas and that is still a reach, could follow through with the threat of seceding alone. But the idea of the states banding together to limit the land grab by the federal government, that is a possibility.

[El Paso Joe]

Al-

You are correct - it is Article III (I KNEW that...). Thank you.

But I still wonder what the object of the Bill in the WA House is. If the Federal Gov't wants to exercise control, the 10th Amendment does not stop them. As I understand the meaning, it just says that the states control what the Fed Gov't hasn't already passed (or will pass) a law to control. The only hope (in our dreams) is that the Supreme Court will hear a case and overturn whatever the Feds have done (this time).

[alan]

http://www.jpfo.org/articles-assd/states-stand-firm.htm

The above link from JPFO discusses movement/actions taken in that direction. I personally have no idea as to how far this might go, though there have been significant objections raised re the Real ID Act.

In any event, it might be worth while or interesting to read the material at the above link, your choice.

[DG45]

I've been trying to get someone to explain to me whether these state soverignity issues, which apparently some members of this forum support, gee and haw with "incorporation" which other members support. Can you tell me? (Or maybe I need to explain "gee and haw".)

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Merged two similar discussions.

[gusmack]

If we're going to engage in a discussion, albeit a good one. . . let's at least get the words right.

"Succeed" is what Obama is going to do at tearing our rights to pieces. "Succeed" is what the "stimulus" plan is NOT going to do.

"Secede" is what the states that made up the Confederate States of America did to remove themselves from the Union, constitutionally, and legally.

"Secession" is the noun form of the word, secede (see above).

"Succession" planning is what conservatives did a poor job of in the 2008 election and the years leading up to it, which is why we're having this discussion right now.

[HvyMtl]

Ok, it was tried before, and, under force of arms, prevented.

Will the next series be successful? This is a long time coming, as the Federal Govt has gotten huge since Lincoln, and has effectively continue to grow ever since...
I think it will depend on the federal government's ability to stop it... A good example would be the collapse of the USSR and how its states seceded, after the effective governmental collapse...
So, if the Fed Govt is, well to over simplify, too broke to prevent it, and it is in the best interest of the State, I see little to stop it...

[405boy]

Al

Instead of running for mayor this time, why not try a State Rep position? It could not hurt. I assisted on a campaign several years ago for my hometown rep in District 180 as I recall in Ga. He won and served several years before retiring. Harder to campaign and get elected than it actually is to serve, we are going to have to put "Ouselves" back in office and the sooner the better, lets get rid of the "professional" red tapers and bring speed, common sense, duty, respect and pride back to our heritage.

[divemedic]

I would point out that Missouri, Georgia, and Washington have thousands of nuclear weapons within their borders.

[USASA]

"I would point out that Missouri, Georgia, and Washington have thousands of nuclear weapons within their borders."

I don't know about Missouri or Georgia...but can you cite a reference for the thousands of nuclear weapons in Washington?

[divemedic]

The highest concentration of nuclear warheads is at the Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific in Bangor, Washington, which is home to more than 2,300 warheads – probably the most nuclear weapons at any one site in the world. In fact, if Washington were to secede from the United States with this nuclear power intact, it would be the third (possibly fourth) most powerful nuclear state in the world.

Malmstrom in Montana has over 500 warheads. King's Bay, GA has over 1,300 warheads.

That is a combined total of 3,100 warheads.



Map here.

[thallub]

It is a big thing about nothing. All of those states are on the federal dole. If the feds cut off funds for those states that feel good legislation would be repealed over night.

[pnac]

It is a big thing about nothing. All of those states are on the federal dole. If the feds cut off funds for those states that feel good legislation would be repealed over night.

The money the Feds get is generated by the states. States send the money to Washington, Feds skim off the top to fund their "departments" and redistribute the money to the various States (some get more than they paid in, most get much less than they paid).

And before you say "But what about Fed income taxes" check the Grace Commission Report. Below is what wiki says, if you want more sources, google "Grace Commission Report".

n 1982, President Ronald Reagan requested an investigation into waste and inefficiency in the Federal government. For this purpose, he initiated a Private Sector Survey on Cost Control, or PSSCC, generally known as The Grace Commission, and asked the members of that commission to: "Be bold. We want your team to work like tireless bloodhounds. Don't leave any stone unturned in your search to root out inefficiency."[1]

[edit] The report

The Grace Commission Report was presented to Congress in January 1984. The Report claimed that if its recommendations were followed, $424 billion could be saved in three years, rising to $1.9 trillion per year by the year 2000. It estimated that the national debt, without these reforms, would rise to $13 trillion by the year 2000, while with the reforms they projected it would rise to only $2.5 trillion.[2] In reality, the debt reached $5.8 trillion in 2000.[3][4]

The Report said that one-third of all income taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government, and another one-third escapes collection due to the underground economy. "With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government."[2]

The Congress did not act on the recommendations.

[edit]

[johnwilliamson062]

The Congress did not act on the recommendations.

More importantly the people did not act on congresses inaction. All hail to the two party system combined with boomer complacency and Xer ignorance.

[pnac]

More importantly the people did not act on congresses inaction. All hail to the two party system combined with boomer complacency and Xer ignorance

Got to agree about the complacency and ignorance. IMHO, the boomers,Xers and whatever generations are equally guilty of not paying attention.
The media did almost no reporting on this (sound familiar?) and even the few that knew about it played hell getting their "Representatives" to do anything (again, sound familiar?).
The present sovereignty declarations coming from the states are the voices of the people finally being heard, I think. We'll know soon ... maybe.
BTW, check this out. I don't know how much is true and how much is speculation:
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Print...&InfoNo=045290

[Playboypenguin]

The total lack of understanding of the state economies and how they function shown in this thread is almost frightening. Add it to the complete shortsightedness on the realities of defense, tax base, and infrastructure and this thread is almost an embarrassment.

[johnwilliamson062]

I'm with PBP. Personally I would have no problem marching against the Confederate States of the West Coast if they tried to secede, especially that giant over rated one with all the problems

I'm not really with PBP. The transition would be very interesting, it certainly would not be smooth, even if the US in general let states or regions slide a way. The major thing would be if or how much debt those states would take with them. By the time this is over the national debt will be about 13 trillion. California, Oregon, Washington, etc. would possibly be in better shape in two years if they could walk away from the national debt. Their share of it proportionate to size of economy or populace likely exceeds 2 trillion dollars. Once they diverted all that money that was going to the fed back into their own pockets I do not see how they could be worse off.

[pnac]

The total lack of understanding of the state economies and how they function shown in this thread is almost frightening. Add it to the complete shortsightedness on the realities of defense, tax base, and infrastructure and this thread is almost an embarrassment.

You pointin' that remark at me ,PBP? If so, enlighten me! I'm easy.

[johnwilliamson062]

PBP,
It would certainly cause some problems for California if they had to renegotiate all their trade agreements, build some sort of military, put embassies around the world, fill n the legislative holes left after national laws were abandoned, but it would certainly not be impossible as you seem to think. Many countries have don it. It is very normal for an area the size of the west coast to be an independent country. The transition, which I would gauge to take two years if allowed to secede peacefully, would be a bit messy but in the end the west coast could certainly stand as a viable economy without the US at large. THe midwest and western states would really be the only ones in trouble as they have no direct route to the outside world.

[The Plainsman]

Yesterday (Thursday) morning, Glen Beck announced on his radio talk show, that TWENTY states were now considering this same type of resolution. He didn't specify which ones, just that 20 states were now involved.

[Inspector3711]

I think the bill that the OP posted may have more to do with border patrol issues here than anything else. The BP has been shaking down regular citizens here on a regular basis and it's causing a ruckus. They set up road blocks on the US side sometimes 30 miles south of the border and check every car. Seems like they oughtta do that at the border to me but then, as I understand it, the legal border that they can cover extends 100 miles to the south.

Aunt Betsy writes her governer when she gets harassed by the feds. We aren't used to this stuff up here.

My one case of heartburn here is that they have found hundreds of illegals this way which is great. What angers me is the sorry liberals that are protesting against them being deported, many of who are aliens as well.

I don't agree with them harassing locals though.

[Al Norris]

Originally Posted by Playboypenguin

The total lack of understanding of the state economies and how they function shown in this thread is almost frightening. Add it to the complete shortsightedness on the realities of defense, tax base, and infrastructure and this thread is almost an embarrassment.

As we should all know, this Republic was founded upon the ideals of shared sovereignty. Certain powers were ceded to the general (national) government and certain powers were retained by the States.

We have really strayed from that ideal. Of that, there can be no question.

As I see it, the purpose of these various declarations of sovereignty is to place control back where it should have stayed in the first place. How the mechanics of that would proceed, is open to discussion.

Would the States suffer (financial) hardships? No question there. Yet, the end game could result in returning both power and fiscal responsibility to the States, as Federal involvement (and expenditures) shrank.

This would possibly be a good thing. This is not to say, it would be easy or without pitfalls. It is however, a workable idea, as long as the citizens understand that hardships would increase. At least for the time that it took to right the "Ship of State," as regards Federal involvement in State affairs.

Remember, we are not talking secession. We are merely demanding that the Feds uphold that Constitution that we all hold so dear. The entire idea of a national mandate to solve a problem, is the idea that legislative "one size fits all" solutions can work in States as diverse as what had then, and still have now. That thinking is anathema to our Republic. It is also what has brought us to the present point in our history.

The only real obstacle to returning our country to its Republican roots, is the people themselves.