Palin signs state sovereignty bill.<!-- google_ad_section_end --> <hr style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" size="1"> <!-- / icon and title --> <!-- message --> <!-- google_ad_section_start -->"While six state legislatures have passed state sovereignty bills, just two governors have signed them. That's Tennessee, and now Alaska." Now, that confuses me because I thought Montana was a done deal... ?? Anyway, way to go Palin. Fox News, five minutes ago.<!-- google_ad_section_end --> <!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> __________________
Quigs opinion : The Bill of Rights (the first amending) spelled out with specificity which powers the feds would have, and said with more specificity that if the power wasn't listed there, that power remained with and belonged forever to the states. The founding fathers, having fought a war with an overbearing British govt, were afraid of a powerful central government. Additionally, many states refused to sign onto the formation of the United States because they didn't want to lose their sovereignty. Therefore, even in the original constitution, the powers of the feds were limited. The first amending actually just reiterated in stronger and more blunt terms - the states have the power, not the feds. We hear this as "states' rights." The feds have obliterated the concept of states' rights with money. They got the income tax, and then as you know they dole out money to the states with "strings attached" - and that's how they trample states' rights. More recently that trampling has been done with the "stimulus package" money. We are not a democracy. We are not subject to the majority, especially not the national majority. We are a Republic of States with a national constitution which may not be violated even if a legislature or a majority vote tries to violate it. That's where a new law, even if voted by the majority, can be ruled unconstitutional and therefore void. Some states are beginning to push hard for their constitutional sovereignty.
