Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: State sovereignty

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    At the risk of being banned by opencarry mods I present the following ;D

    http://www.leg.state.nv.us/75th2009/Bills/AJR/AJR15.pdf

    We declare our sovereignty. Let not the government take our arms. What must be done now is, ensure nevada voting remains pro second amendment.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    Wow, its here! I had heard this bill might be coming. Am happy to see it for real!

    One could argue that this is the most important bill in our legislature!

    Please support it!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    agreed. I was wondering how long it would take for them to introduce.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    Since the primary purpose of government is to secure our pre-existing and inalienable Rights, we need to be vigilant and support whatever measures serve that purpose.

    There will be considerable knee-jerk opposition to this movement by those who still associate the concept of state sovereignty with the oppression of southern blacks during the Civil War era.

    Today, however, it is not the states but the federal government which has become totally despotic and poses an enormous threat to our families and our freedoms.

    We all need to actively support this.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    I've been in contact with my legislators for a while. It goes beyond just that. Most people aren't even aware of what's going on. I've educated all my family members and friends at work about it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    ourmanthejoker wrote:
    It goes beyond just that. Most people aren't even aware of what's going on.
    The dark side's weakness is exposure to the light. That's why they do everything in their power to keep everyone in the dark, distracted with high-definition football and CNN stories about cute puppies getting adopted. What is going on in the USA and indeed the world is far more than "politics as usual."

    Knowledge is power. If we are to have any chance at preserving human freedom in America and indeed in the world, we need to rapidly educate ourselves now while the window of opportunity is still open, and also do everything we are able to educate our families, friends and neighbors to the very real and deadly situation which threatens us all. We are already far along the path towards complete "Sovietization," or whatever you want to call the nightmare which is quickly become plain to see.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    AJR-15 Referred to Committee on Elections, Procedures, Ethics, and Constitutional Amendments
    Assembly Elections, Procedures, Ethics, and Constitutional Amendments - 75th (2009) Session

    Agendas and Minutes: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/75th2009/reports/committeeindexAssembly.cfm?ID=4

    Regular Meetings in Room 3142 at 3:45 p.m. Tuesdays and Thursdays.

    Elections, Procedures, and Ethics: Ellen Koivisto, Chair; Harry Mortenson, Vice Chair

    Constitutional Amendments: Harry Mortenson, Chair; Ellen Koivisto, Vice Chair

    Marcus Conklin
    William Horne
    Ruben Kihuen
    Harvey Munford
    James Ohrenschall
    Tick Segerblom
    Debbie Smith
    Ty Cobb
    Heidi Gansert
    John Hambrick
    James Settelmeyer
    Please email, write, call or fax the (above) committee members and voice strong support for AJR-15.
    Email contact info for the above committee members:

    Cobb, Ty
    tcobb@asm.state.nv.us

    Conklin, Markus
    mconklin@asm.state.nv.us

    Gansert, Heidi S
    hgansert@asm.state.nv.us

    Hambrick, John
    jhambrick@asm.state.nv.us

    Horne, William
    whorne@asm.state.nv.us

    Kihuen, Ruben
    rkihuen@asm.state.nv.us

    Koivisto, Ellen M
    Elections, Procedures, and Ethics, Chair;
    Constitutional Amendments, Vice Chair
    ekoivisto@asm.state.nv.us

    Mortenson, Harry
    Elections, Procedures, and Ethics, Vice Chair;
    Constitutional Amendments, Chair
    hmortenson@asm.state.nv.us

    Munford, Harvey J
    hmunford@asm.state.nv.us

    Ohrenschall, James
    johrenschall@asm.state.nv.us

    Segerblom, Tick
    rsegerblom@lvcoxmail.com

    Settelmeyer, James
    jsettelmeyer@asm.state.nv.us

    Smith, Debbie
    dsmith@asm.state.nv.us

    Full contact info (for all Assemblymen) here: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/75th2009/Legislators/Assembly/alist.cfm

    And don't forget, you can anonymously share your opinion (cast your 'vote') and type an optional opinion here:
    http://www.leg.state.nv.us/75th2009/opinions/Poll/?CFID=1128668&CFTOKEN=10304530

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    I hope it passes, as it would be a step in the right direction. However, absent the state getting an actual backbone, I tend to think this is a tempest in a teapot.

    How much credibility do we have complaining about Federal encroachment on states' rights when we keep sending people like Harry Reid to Washington.

    Something like this rings a little more true coming from Montana, Idaho, Wyoming than it does Nevada (imo).

    Here's to small steps and small victories,
    Bob

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    471

    Post imported post

    So someone explain the full ramifications of this bill to me, in "Nevada schools are 50th in the USA" style English.

    At face value to me, it looks like it doesn't specifically say what we'll be doing for ourselves. On the other hand, it makes me think if the Obamanites passed a AWB, we'd get to claim it doesn't effect us...


    Help.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    Many states have introduced sovereignty resolutions, and some have passed.

    It is a "resoloution"basically asserting states' rights and "invoking" the 10th amendment to our great U.S. Constitution.

    http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

    http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/...nth-amendment/

    And from http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/...alking-points/
    1. The Constitution was written under the principle of “positive grant.” What this means is quite simple. The federal government is authorized to exercise only those powers which are “positively” “granted” to it by the Constitution. If a power is specifically listed in the Constitution, the federal government can do it - and vice versa. This principle was so important to the founding fathers that they codified it in law as the 10th Amendment.
    2. The language of the 10th is clear and concise: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Thus, the federal government’s powers are limited to a specific set of activities – the rest is to be handled by the state government, or locally, by the people themselves.

    3. The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.

    4. If the Congress had been intended to carry out anything they claim would promote the “general welfare,” what would be the point of listing its specific powers in Article I, Section 8, since these would’ve already been covered?

    5. James Madison, during the Constitutional ratification process, proposed the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.

    6. The Tenth Amendment was adopted after the Constitutional ratification process to emphasize the fact that the states remained individual and unique sovereignties; that they were empowered in areas that the Constitution did not delegate to the federal government. With this in mind, any federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a usurpation of state sovereignty - and illegal.

    7. Tragically, the Tenth Amendment has become almost a nullity at this point in our history, but there are a great many reasons to bring it to the forefront. Most importantly, though, we must keep in mind that the Founders envisioned a loose confederation of states – not a one-size-fits-all solution for everything that could arise. Why? The simple answer lies in the fact that they had just escaped the tyranny of a king who thought he knew best how to govern everything – including local colonies from across an ocean.

    8. Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. Second, the people of a state know what is best for them; they do not need bureaucrats, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives. Think about it. If Hitler had ruled just Berlin and Stalin had ruled just Moscow, the whole world might be a different place today.

    9. A constitution which does not provide strict limits is just the thing any government would be thrilled to have, for, as Lord Action once said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

    10. We agree with historian Kevin Gutzman, who has said that those who would give us a “living” Constitution are actually giving us a dead one, since such a thing is completely unable to protect us against the encroachments of government power.
    Although now a dead bill, take a look at New Hampshire's resolution bill: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html

    And the Oklahoma bill which did pass: http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/20...JR1003_int.rtf

    More state resolutions here: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/...y-resolutions/



  11. #11
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    jfrey123 wrote:
    So someone explain the full ramifications of this bill to me, in "Nevada schools are 50th in the USA" style English.

    At face value to me, it looks like it doesn't specifically say what we'll be doing for ourselves.* On the other hand, it makes me think if the Obamanites passed a AWB, we'd get to claim it doesn't effect us...*


    Help.*
    Basically, it does nothing but tell the federal government to be careful.

    It is an empty threat at this point, but I think it has some unsaid implications. If the federal government continues to act outside of its constitutional bounds it may find many states quite unhappy.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    471

    Post imported post

    Felid`Maximus wrote:
    Basically, it does nothing but tell the federal government to be careful.

    It is an empty threat at this point, but I think it has some unsaid implications. If the federal government continues to act outside of its constitutional bounds it may find many states quite unhappy.
    Ok. I had the empty threat vibe, mainly because the news hasn't been running with any of these Sovereignty stories. I understand my Constitution, my Bill of Rights, etc.

    I hope this bill gains teeth, yet I'm afraid to see what happens to our leaders once the Fed threatens to pull their state project funding...

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    Our sales tax covers everything we need in this state. We don't need federal funding for anything really.

    Did you know the department of education only provide about 8 percent of a school's budget on average? ;D



  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    471

    Post imported post

    If our sales tax covers it all, why are we 49 billion in the hole again?

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    because your elected officials overspend on stupid s***

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    Reliable sources say this bill probably will not get a hearing.

    If ya like this bill (resolution), better do some serious emailing to the committee and the Assembly Speaker and the Majority Leader.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    A non-binding 10th Amendment sovereignty resolution sounds good, but in the case of Nevada seems rather counterintuitive because the state constitution explicitly states:

    Nevada State Constitution
    Article 1 Section 2


    Purpose of government; paramount allegiance to United States. All political power is inherent in the people[.] Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people; and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require it. But the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States; and no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair[,] subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existance [existence], and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.
    If you want to have any real effect, then rather than supporting the non-binding 10th Amendment resolution which has just been introduced in the Nevada state legislature, you ought to ask your representative why your state constitution explicitly surrenders all power to the federal government. I also suggest it would be instructive to study the history of this provision, and find out who exactly was responsible for its insertion into the constitution in the first place, and just whose payroll they were on.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    spiritof76 wrote:
    A non-binding 10th Amendment sovereignty resolution sounds good, but in the case of Nevada seems rather counterintuitive because the state constitution explicitly states:


    Nevada State Constitution
    Article 1 Section 2


    Purpose of government; paramount allegiance to United States. All political power is inherent in the people[.] Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people; and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require it. But the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States; and no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair[,] subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existance [existence], and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.
    If you want to have any real effect, then rather than supporting the non-binding 10th Amendment resolution which has just been introduced in the Nevada state legislature, you ought to ask your representative why your state constitution explicitly surrenders all power to the federal government. I also suggest it would be instructive to study the history of this provision, and find out who exactly was responsible for its insertion into the constitution in the first place, and just whose payroll they were on.
    You make a good point. Perhaps the issue lies here:
    ... the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States ...
    It appears obvious to many people the Federal gov't has progressed the bounds of the U. S. Constitution in many areas - with improper checks & balances by the Supreme Court.

    Although you raise a very good point, I'll opine there is no conflict with AJR-15 as it is a resolution and not a law.

    More comments from everyone, please.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, ,
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    I really have to agree with spiritof76... with that in the state constitution, it is virtually saying that we are not Nevadans... we just live in an area called Nevada and we are Americans (not in the good patriotic sense).

    To me, a 10th ammendmant resolution seems foolish and has absolutely no teeth in light of the Nevada Constitution. Perhaps this was written intentionally in when Nevada became a state in the Civil War in fear that it too might cede to the Confederacy.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    I certainly see your point.

    However, this is a resolution and not a law.

    I still think it is a good bill/resolution.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, ,
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    varminter22 wrote:
    I certainly see your point.

    However, this is a resolution and not a law.

    I still think it is a good bill/resolution.
    in principle, I agree... just a disappointment that it really has no teeth either way.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NV
    Posts
    148

    Post imported post

    Update:

    Mr. Settelmeyer has sent out the following email regarding the nevada state sovereignty resolution:

    AJR 15 that Claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitutionwill likely not get a hearing without your help. If the committee head does not hear this bill by April 10th and vote it out, the bill will be no more. We then will not be able to introduce it again for two years.
    If you feel that asserting our 10th amendment right to sovereignty is important we could use your help. Here is a link to the committee agenda's, if you don't see AJR15 on the agenda before the April 10th deadline you may want to contact the chair and respectfully ask for a hearing for AJR 15. Only 3 meetings are left for that committee.
    http://www.leg.state.nv.us/75th2009/...embly.cfm?ID=4

    Elections, Procedures, and Ethics
    : Ellen Koivisto, Chair; Harry Mortenson, Vice Chair


    James Settelmeyer






    Here is my forward to the Chair/Vice Chair:

    Madame Koivisto and Monsieur Mortenson,
    My name is David Anthony Phaup. I am an Airman in the United states
    air force. JR-15 is an important bill that will secure our state's
    sovereignty under the 9th and 10th amendments of the US Constitution.
    Would you please put AJR-15 on the agenda for the committee.

    Sincerely,
    David Phaup
    Nevada Resident
    US Air Force
    [code]

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    261

    Post imported post

    Have to remember here that Nevada is "Battle Born" and though Lincoln REALLY needed the silver, (and other precious metals) for the war effort/reconstruction we would not have likely been admitted to the Union without such a clause in our Constitution. Nevada was just a pile of dirt with no other assets worthy of the Feds' attention at the time...

    Not saying I agree with that crap about U.S. Gov't being "Supreme"... just a thought about the timing and process of Nevada's statehood.




  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    It begs the question of which constitution - Nevada's or the USA's -- is superceding? Consider a HOA writes a bylaw. It's binding to any homeowner within the limits of the HOA, unless that bylaw violates or otherwise is forbidden by a local, state, or federal law. So even if the NV Constitution pleadges it's undying allegiance to the USA, the US Constitution still protects it. Yes, I know a HOA may not "secede" from the city or state, but I think it's an acceptable parallel.

    If it was the intention of NV, at the time of joining the union, to waive this right, I feel the joint resolution still holds teeth because if the people, through it's state representatives, are expressing they no longer feel that way, and regardless of the state constitution, the 10th amendment still protects the people of the state.

    Of course, I never studied law, so it may well be that I'm completely wrong...but if I am, and this JR lacks "teeth" it's still a first step in the right direction.

    Tim

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    261

    Post imported post

    I have to agree with you, Tim.. no lawyer myself, and not aware of the "leaderships" intent at the time, other than my previous speculation, it does beg that question and others.

    But then ask anyone who calls it the war of Northern aggression, and they may in fact be justified in doing so, as according to my copy of the constitution, those states were within their rights to secede, and as Varminter pretty much said before, the Feds' have certainly continued overstepping the boundaries of the Constitution.

    Begs LOTS of questions, for me including: Do I have enough ammo?
    (political/cerebral/etc., as well as literal)

    I certainly think we all as citizens of the United States, need to remind the federal government that they are WAY too big for their britches, and that some of us, at least, and not going to to gentle into that krystalnacht. (sp?)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •