49 States of the Union?

[bearcat87]

Looks like some in New Hampshire want to succeed form the nation.

This is a quote from the bill.

"Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2, Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire; and

Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised;”

The constitution was meant for the states to be more powerful than the fed but that is no longer the case. It would take some serious work to change it back but I'm up for it.

What I find interesting is that the media is not reporting this.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html

[texasmade]

interesting...i think i found my current event to type my essay up on for my Govt class lol(btw thanks haha)

[bearcat87]

Well then this info might also help with your essay. New Hampshire is not the only state angered at the current situation.

Washington State
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...overeignty.pdf

Arizona
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument....s/hcr2024p.htm

New Hampshire
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html

Oklahoma
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussi...rticle=119309;

Missouri
http://www.house.mo.gov/content.aspx...ills/HR212.HTM



All are links to bills of respectives states about limiting the feds to the constitution.

[texasmade]

wow...can someone say civil war part 2 lol

[SeneNatten]

This is hardly a succession but rather a re-interpretation of the Federal Constitution. It is silly to assert rights founded "whereas" New Hampshire recommended certain language in that constitution, but asserting rights based on the document ratified and currently in force is reasonable.

The real argument here is over who decides what powers are granted to the federal government--that is, who interprets the Federal Constitution. That role has belonged solely to the federal Supreme Court for a long time, although it was the Supreme Court which declared that role for itself. And the Federal government will enforce those rights.

Here, New Hampshire is essentially saying that no, when it deems certain actions on behalf of the federal government to be extra-constitutional, the New Hampshire government itself will step in with the correct interpretation. Problem is that those legal issues will always be subject to scrutiny in Federal courts--backed by the entire power of the Executive branch of the Federal government.

It could theoretically lead to succession, but that is a long way away from saying, "hey, wait, this isn't the arrangement we agreed to," which is what I read this bill to be saying.

[edit] I'll add that the problem with a State declaring its own interpretation of the Federal Constitution is that every state, then, would probably find its own interpretation. One State's interpretation would then conflict with that of another State, which rather defeats the point of having a unified--"federal"--constitution.

The proper way to recognize and correct the Federal government from overstepping its bounds would be to amend the Constitution.

The problem with that is that "states rights" has become a code-word which amounts to "apartheid" in the minds of many. Also, there is a cogent argument to be made that the United States would have suffered far more than it did without enlarging Federal power during the Great Depression, which has convinced many that Federal power is a categorical good thing. Defining which rights belong to which government ought to be done carefully and with specificity, which the New Hampshire bill does not do.

[TBD]

Civil War part 1 was fought over states rights. Sure it was the "right" to hold slaves, but the main beef was that the feds had no right constitutionally to tell the states it was against the law. The first civil war was fought with bullets, this one will be fought with money. No state will willingly detach from the federal teat.

I like this bill and would liek to see more of them enacted, mainly because I feel that too much power has been ceded to the federal government. Bring the power back home where it belongs.The governor is much more accessible than the President. Our state legislators listen to the people a lot more and quicker than the federal congress critters. The states created the federal government with the understanding that they could abolish it also. Lincoln used force to put the lie to that thought.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

[Jason]

California doesn't need any bills to secede....we are already our own country. :P

[texasmade]

Civil War part 1 was fought over states rights. Sure it was the "right" to hold slaves, but the main beef was that the feds had no right constitutionally to tell the states it was against the law. The first civil war was fought with bullets, this one will be fought with money. No state will willingly detach from the federal teat.

I like this bill and would liek to see more of them enacted, mainly because I feel that too much power has been ceded to the federal government. Bring the power back home where it belongs.The governor is much more accessible than the President. Our state legislators listen to the people a lot more and quicker than the federal congress critters. The states created the federal government with the understanding that they could abolish it also. Lincoln used force to put the lie to that thought.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

quite a big soap box(not as big as sage's tho :lol: )

[outsidelinebacker20]

Don`t look for anyone to try to stop California from seceding.

[TBD]

Also, there is a cogent argument to be made that the United States would have suffered far more than it did without enlarging Federal power during the Great Depression, which has convinced many that Federal power is a categorical good thing.

There is also an a good argument that increased federal power worsened and lengthened the great depression.
Of course we are now seeing the same theory of increased government being tried to ease the so-called depression we are in now.

[woof]

Also, there is a cogent argument to be made that the United States would have suffered far more than it did without enlarging Federal power during the Great Depression, which has convinced many that Federal power is a categorical good thing.

There is also an a good argument that increased federal power worsened and lengthened the great depression.
Of course we are now seeing the same theory of increased government being tried to ease the so-called depression we are in now.

It might have worsened and lengthened the Great Depression in the short term back then, but it helped create the fairly stable system we have now. The New Deal set the stage for the currently regulatory system that we have now. Social Security, FDIC, FDA, the NLRB, and a handful other other agencies that sprang up in the ensuing years.

Many argue that the current recession was caused by a pullback of government intervention during the Clinton/Greenspan years, which was only enhanced by strong deregulation efforts during the Bush era, so that banks and financial institutions did not have to work under the tight auspices of the SEC and various watchdog groups.

As for the OP's statement, these states aren't trying to secede or reinterpret the constitution at all. SeneNatten is absolutely right. If you read through each of the bills, the state are just reaffirming the well known principle that every state is its own sovereign in relation to each other and the federal government. If the states don't think that actions of the federal government are constitutional, they're suppose to sue the federal government over the issue and let the Supreme Court decide. If the states aren't capable of doing that, they need to find a new State Attorney General who has the motivation to do so.

As it currently stands, none of the issues laid out by the NH bill actually happen - we don't have martial law except under the absolute rarest of circumstances, and it's typically with the full consent of both congresses; we don't require service from anyone except in times of war; our First Amendment rights are among the strongest Free Speech rights in the world; and each state is perfectly entitled to its own gun control laws, EXCEPT when it involves transport/commerce over state lines. I don't even know what the fourth item on the NH bill's list is.
The bill of rights stands as strong as it ever did, and the states are just reminding the new administration of the federal-state power compromise.

[sagedil]

Civil War part 1 was fought over states rights. Sure it was the "right" to hold slaves, but the main beef was that the feds had no right constitutionally to tell the states it was against the law. The first civil war was fought with bullets, this one will be fought with money. No state will willingly detach from the federal teat.

I like this bill and would liek to see more of them enacted, mainly because I feel that too much power has been ceded to the federal government. Bring the power back home where it belongs.The governor is much more accessible than the President. Our state legislators listen to the people a lot more and quicker than the federal congress critters. The states created the federal government with the understanding that they could abolish it also. Lincoln used force to put the lie to that thought.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

quite a big soap box(not as big as sage's tho :lol: )

Hey, I haven't even....never mind. :roll:

[TexDis]

Any kind of efforts to secede by any states are positive developments. The tyrant Lincoln killed the Republic and the federal government has continuously become increasingly totalitarian since. The Empire is now too disparate and unwieldly and it is only a matter of time before it comes apart like Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union.

[chainsnuser]

The Empire is now too disparate and unwieldly and it is only a matter of time before it comes apart like Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union.

Hopefully not as violent. I mean, the civil war in the United States was one of the most disastrous wars of all times even though it was waged with the mitiltary technology of the mid 19th century, even before dynamite was invented(!) and while it was still not normal to wage "total wars", involving the suffering and killing of civilians.

With the 21st century American "killing-technology" (whose welfare seemed to be the only concern of the "semi-fascist" Bush administration) a new American civil war could easily become the end of the world.

Cheers!

[texasmade]

Civil War part 1 was fought over states rights. Sure it was the "right" to hold slaves, but the main beef was that the feds had no right constitutionally to tell the states it was against the law. The first civil war was fought with bullets, this one will be fought with money. No state will willingly detach from the federal teat.

I like this bill and would liek to see more of them enacted, mainly because I feel that too much power has been ceded to the federal government. Bring the power back home where it belongs.The governor is much more accessible than the President. Our state legislators listen to the people a lot more and quicker than the federal congress critters. The states created the federal government with the understanding that they could abolish it also. Lincoln used force to put the lie to that thought.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

quite a big soap box(not as big as sage's tho :lol: )

Hey, I haven't even....never mind. :roll:

lol i say this because the few rants of yours ive read were somewhat of a short essay