0 votes

If you're getting behind NH, MO, OK, MT, MI, HI, SC, GA, CA, UT, CO, and WA in standing up to the Fed, AZ is also now on board.

Also see: NH, MO, OK, MT, MI, HI, WA, SC, GA, UT, CA, TX,
States Planning / Motioning Towards Reasserting Sovereignty:
AL, AK, AR, CO, ID, IN, KS, ME, NV, and PA (as of 02/17/2009)


REFERENCE TITLE: Sovereignty; Tenth Amendment. | HCR 2024

Introduced by

Representatives Burges, Ash, Biggs, Boone, Gowan, Mason, Montenegro, Pancrazi, Seel, Williams: Barto, Campbell CL, Court, Crandall, Crump, Driggs, Fleming, Goodale, Hendrix, Kavanagh, Lesko, McComish, McGuire, Miranda B, Murphy, Nichols, Pratt, Quelland, Stevens, Tobin, Weiers JP, Senator Harper

See it for yourself:

If you believe in "State Sovereignty", make sure that you bug the hell out of your representatives to pass legislation like this. Also in your letters make sure that you call attention to the efforts of these states. Make them feel that their is a strong movement towards enforcing sovereignty outside of your individual state. That will give your representatives the feeling that their not totally leaving the herd. We need to make a firm push to get these bills actually passed- I'm not talking passive action...I'm saying assert your own personal authority as a citizen of your state. The power of your state derives from you, just as the Federal government's power derives from the states. It is long since past time that we reassert this authority. State Sovereignty will give us back our greatest line of defense against oppressive Federal government! From there we really can reverse all the harm that has been done to this Republic!!!!!!
Breaking news user "celeste" has posted that eight states which I have added to the above list are now pushing for reassertion of sovereignty!!!!!!
Here is a link to Celeste's post http://www.dailypaul.com/node/81826

Keep pushing your representatives!!!

Hamilton, though an ardent proponent of Federalism, admitted "an entire consolidation of the States into one national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them would be altogether dependent on the general will. But as the plan of the convention [the Constitutional Convention of 1787] aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all right of sovereignty which they before had and which were not, by that act exclusively delegated to the United States."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Did you forget the Patriot Act?

Unthinkable before 911 that we would BEG for our liberties to be taken. This is a group that has done many inconceivable actions. Think outside of the box, they certainly do! Remember one mans trash, (FED) is another mans treasure (NWO).


The point may be a good one. These guys LOVE the divide and conquer strategy. The've used it a million times in the past. If they can divide the States (ideologically) they break the strength of the United States.

There is no doubt, the States are the Sovereign and the federal government is the servant. Feds = TAIL. Unified and Sovereign State Republics = DOG. Washington is long past-due for a good wagging.

Perhaps we should be pushing to have ALL of our State legislatures to, in ONE voice, tell Washington "Be still! Go to your room". Before we do that however, we had better damn well be prepared as States and as cities and as communities to take care of ourselves.


Another worrisome unintended consequence: This whole "State sovereignty" issue (due to the fed's behaving outside of the Constitution) could devolve into a call for the creation of a "new and improved" constitution. THAT must not happen.

When is somebody gonna call for a massive, National tax-revolt? (I guess I just did!). Cut-off their money and clearly remind these idiotic liars who's driving the bus.

Perhaps we need a website where people can pledge to withhold their tax payments to the Fed and instead send it to the Treasury of YOUR home State!... Strength in numbers and April 15th fast approacheth.

Tell me, it wouldn't warm your heart to see 30 million Americans say "Hell No!". I'm not payin' for this...

You are right on the money man.

I agree, all states should set forth as united states of America their sovereignty flexing and remind Washington DC, they work for us and we can lay them off permanently.

Detective Krum Investigates:

Detective Krum Investigates:

I see your point about divide and conqour

I see your point about divide and conquer. However I know when people consider this fact most will enviably think about the so-called "Civil War" but, even though the reason the South left may be the same, the cicumstances are totally different now.

First consider that the North and the South were two totally different distinct cultures during that time period. To the extent that it was almost like two different countries. We did not understand one another- and difference (especially back then) created stereotypes and animosity. Though neighbors it was not hard to draw a line in the sand and say....these people are not the same as us, there heathens! Travel was not a frequent for most of the people who fought before the war began, most had never seen their enemy except through plays and as the butt of newspaper drawings.
However today we mingle on a REGULAR basis. I have friends from all over. Actually, further using myself as an example, my father has a Southern accent and my mother has a Northern one. People always tell me I sound like someone from the middle states. It would be very hard to get me to see any part of the United States as foreign, as I'm sure it would be for you. So even though there is still culture differences we are all aware of them and generally not offended in the since that we would be willing to kill each other. We look around and see Americans, not Yankees and Rebels in the old sense.
Slavery was also an issue, though much was propagandized to the Northern citizens to add a sense of moral justice to their military drafting cause. Most Northerners came to the South expecting every farm to have slaves, yet they were completely mislead. Only 10% of the south had slaves, the rest were just agrarian farmers fighting because they felt their freedom was being usurped through a system of unfair heavy taxation.
A moral cause like slavery would also not be an issue- since there is little morals left that the Federal government could claim it supports.
Also on a map the Confederate States were defined by a line directly under the North. That would not be a factor since the states asserting sovereignty are spread out all over the U.S. map!

I posted more on this in some of my earlier comments under this article if anyone wants to read more. There probably a little better thought out since I'm now running on a couple hours of sleep. ;-)


They tend to work with the program. IE (Patriot Act) we elected to give away rights to be "free". Same thing with the states, we attempt state sovereignty to be "free" of the Fed control and what we have just done was demantle the country leaving a gaping hole and room to further dethrone our constitution and thus leaving a opening to roll in the NWO. We need to stay a UNITED STATES to be effective in powers. As for who will fight the states, the other countries that get a stake in the US if we succeed (greed).........

I think you are confused

I think you are confused about the 10th Amendment. This is not about secession, it is about sovereignty. No one said anything about secession. This is about a resolution in the state legislature that "reminds" the federal government of their position in the Constitution. The states are taking action to put them in their place not a threat to leave. If you are as tired as I am of all the "stretching" of our Constitution that the federal govt. thinks they can get away with then I suggest you support such a resolution in your own state and get behind any who have the patriotism to their country to present such a resolution. Read the text of the Arizona resolution for clarification.

"People demand freedom only when they have no power. "
--Henry Longfellow

"People demand freedom only when they have no power. "
--Henry Longfellow

Nicely said. And exactly what I had been trying to get across.

Its about asserting our states are sovereign entities which delegated specific powers, not a call to break apart from the Union. Thank you for posting.

What would you suggest?

Any effort that involves large numbers of people banding together would seem like a coordinated effort- and this hasn't happened all at once. Oklahoma filed theirs on Jun 15, 2008.

I am by no means calling for physical rebellion! I think most of us are just talking about asserting the tenth and eleventh amendment- same as our ancestors did. Without sovereignty the states have no teeth to oppose the Federal usurpation of powers. If you back down, then what? Allow them to get further entrenched? Then we just keep scratching at the wall? You can't win that way.

What army would we fight when citizens from the states compose the military? The last war over secession, started not when they began to secede, because many northerners felt they had the right. It was only when newspapers began posting about how the ships in the northern harbors would rot and northern city works would cease, due to the cotton exportation leaving northern ports being moved to Charleston and Savannah. Massive money through tariffs and taxes would be gone. That is how they convinced the Northern gentleman and then pushed the issue of slavery into the picture to give those who were lesser informed a sense of being morally right.
Will they have that kind of excuse in today's America? Will they find their numbers?

Fixing the Federal Government.

Seven months ago is very recent history. This has been in the works at the states levels for a while. They all seem to be "jumping on".

However to do so would be to fix it without the Constitution.

"State Sovereignty" is a intricate part of the Constitution. If you disregard that fact then what is their to fix. Its basically like pleading with the Federal government- same as the people of Cuba begging Castro or China begging Mao.

If we reasserted state sovereignty we would of course have to stand vigilant over our state governments- people will always try to abuse power if left to their own ends. However I don't think us patriots are planning on handing the keys over once we finally have them back. Maintaining control over the state could be done. It was proven long ago and was held for a long time. It can be done again.
I'm curious as to how could the federal government morph into anything once the states have reasserted sovereignty? Their powers would be limited by the Constitution and held firm by the States. Any group of men or party who would try to grab control would have to hire an outside army or utilize a foreign one, since who would fight when our military is composed of state citizens. Would any citizen want to live in a slave state when his fellow men live in free ones?

Why would it be without a

Why would it be without a constitution? That is nonsense. Restoration in all forms.

I meant to write

I meant to write Reformation, not Restoration.

Because when the Constitution was written the Founders....

Because when the Constitution was written the Founders based the whole concept around the union being composed of sovereign states!!!!

Your taking the freaking engine out of the car and trying to drive that baby home!!!

We all should agree that the Founding Fathers did not create an all-powerful national government. There were very few of them who desired to form a strong central government similar to the British model from which the colonies had just seceded. Actually at the 1787 Constitutional Convention, with a majority of delegates present, a motion was proposed to have the convention form a national government, but the resolution could not even find someone to second the motion, so it died there on the floor. Our Founders having just cast off the shackles of oppression (King George III), were determined to create a non-intrusive central government which could, and would be controlled by the people which empowered it.
Hamilton said "an entire consolidation of the States into one national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them would be altogether dependent on the general will. But as the plan of the convention [the Constitutional Convention of 1787] aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all right of sovereignty which they before had and which were not, by that act exclusively delegated to the United States."
Some may ask, "What rights and sovereignty did the states have before the Constitution of 1787?" Prior to the ratification of the Constitution of 1787, the states were members of a union under the Articles of Confederation. Article II of the Articles of Confederation declared that "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled." The states, prior to the ratification of the Constitution of 1787, were sovereign, free, and independent. These same attributes were retained when they seceded from the government created by the Articles of Confederation and then acceded to the new government formed by the Constitution of 1787. The States were, and still should be, the primary protector of "We the people" as was the intention of the Founding Fathers. By removing sovereignty from the Constitutional equation, you are stripping the "Tree of Liberty" of its bark. It will still stand, but it will eventually be dead in the ground.

The 1826 West Point textbook on Constitutional Law, By William Rawle of Pennsylvania, wrote that the formation of the Federal government "...was not the simple act of a homogeneous body of men, either large or small. It was to be the act of MANY INDEPENDENT STATES [emphasis added],...it was to be the act of the people of each state, and not the people at large." Rawle's also described who may alter or abolish the constitution under which a people live and how it can be done: " A moral power equal to and of the same nature with that which made, alone can destroy." Thus, following the instruction of this early constitutional authority, once we understand who created the Federal government, we will see who has the right to change or destroy that government.

John C. Calhoun once commented that "Ours is a system of governments, compounded of the separate governments of the several States composing the Union, and of one common government of all its members, called the Government of the United States. The former [the states] preceded the latter, which was created by their [the states'] agency." Thus the sovereign states created the Federal government to be their agent and to perform only those duties that the states, acting on behalf of the people of their respective states, specifically delegated to their agent, the Federal government. Calhoun noted that the people were careful to maintain their right to control any government that they created: "It [government, both Federal and state] has for its fundamental principle, the great cardinal maxim, that the people are the source of all power; that the governments of the several states and of the United States were created by them, and for them; that the powers conferred on them are not surrendered, but delegated; and as such are held in trust, and not absolutely; and can be rightfully exercised only in furtherance of the objects for which they were delegated."

I think its long since past time we quit ignoring the key pieces of what made the Constitution work. We have over 100+ years of using the Constitution without sovereignty being a roadblock for the Federal government- how has that worked out for us???? Your not wanting to fix the problem your wanting to prop the system back up so it can fail again! I realize you probably mean well and I am not trying to come down on you, however you can't bake a cake without the eggs and flour!

Think outside of the box

Think outside of the box, they certainly do! Remember one mans trash, (FED) is another mans treasure (NWO). IE: Patriot Act we never would have seen that coming (although the media seemed to know the answers 30 minutes after the towers were hit.( That was always odd to me.

Thanks for the history

Thanks for the history lesson, you showed me, ummm not!!
Really way too much information for something so basic and simple and clear. I assume that your are a man as men tend over state, to be "blow hards" just to hear their own voice. Simplify, dont over complicate. Fighters for the NWO: Other Counties with a interest in the US IE: China, UK, whom already own much of the US anyways and will protect their interest. Really.

It's not too much information

It's just a tip of the iceberg.

Mind you, it's a good, solid tip. Good weight. Very cold. Pure H20.



Okay, take this comment,

fix the grammar, restructure a tad to stand on its own, and then post as its own forum entry.

Excellently written.



Thanks for the comment. The Iceberg bit was excellent!

I might take your advice and try making a post out of that tomorrow. It will give me a chance to hear myself talk again, as I have just found out that the deep down urge I feel to be a blowhard is part of the male experience. :-D Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Anyway, my diction is fairly good but I openly admit that I'm not the best with grammatical rules. So I may have to get someone to proofread before I post it.
Once I get that done I think I may make an informative video to pass around using political excerpts, live action footage, and cell animation. I already have some of the animation ideas worked up. Technically I'm an illustrator by trade, but I was trained in college to go into cell animation (the modern computer way, not with the old machines). Thus far I have a few small features under my belt, as well as a couple commercials. Nothing major of course, but I am capable enough to cobble together a professional film.
If anyone who reads this would like to help, I would gladly share credit. I don't have intentions of making profit for my work.

I can help proofread

if you give me some lead time, depending on the length. Once upon a time, I was in publishing -- I cowrote a book, and helped edit. Then the firm died a cruel death shortly after we went to market.

But still ... I'm pretty goodly with sepling and gramer.

Hit me up at my dp user name at gmail.



Will do.

Thanks for the offer. If you don't mind doing it, I'll have something regarding the article to be posted in your email tomorrow afternoon. No pressure, just whenever you can get around to it.
If your still interested after that.....Lol...then I'll probably get you to go over some of the text segments I have already scripted for the film. There is not a ton but I plan to make it pretty interesting. Also please feel free to share any ideas you may have on it because with your permission, I will put your name, nickname, or whatever you want to go by in the credits.

That sucks that the firm falling through. What type of book did you coauthor? Most of the stuff I have illustrated has been done for children's books. Usually I work on other peoples stuff, however lately I have been writing a couple of short kid type historical picture books based on a few notable American Founders. Of course I slipped a little of the Jeffersonian constitutional theory into them when it was possible. They haven't been published yet but I expect no problem getting them through. I'm hoping to get backing so that I can create a whole line of similar styled books but with the economy as it is who knows.

lol I love people like you,

lol I love people like you, so entertaining. Whenever something major pops up, "it's all the work of the NWO". Might as well say Ron Paul is the work of the NWO.

New Hampshire talks Civil War against feds!

The New Hampshire state legislature took an unbelievably bold step today by introducing a resolution to declare certain actions by the federal government to completely totally void and warning that certain future acts will be viewed as a "breach of peace" with the states themselves that risks "nullifying the Constitution."

This act by New Hampshire is a clear warning to the federal government that they could face being stripped of their power by the States (presumably through civil war!

The remarkable document outlines with perfect clarity, some basics long forgotten. For instance, it reminds Congress "That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever;. . . . . therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force;"

Boycott Israeli goods!

"The essence of freedom is the proper limitation of government". ~ Founding Fathers

Large enough scale for peaceful

revolution and yes it could be plausible. If people become violent it will end quicker than you can blink.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

My Indiana representative responded!

Here is his response:

I agree, the biggest problems are coming from the federal government. I
will see what I can find out.

-----Original Message-----
I have been following the states of New Hampshire, Missouri,Washington
and now Arizona which have legislation on their floorsabout state
sovereignty. Here is a link to the New Hampshirelegislation.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html Isupport
Indiana doing the same thing. Our federal government is nolonger
representing the people and I along with just about everyperson I talk
to am tired of it. I would appreciate if you would lookinto this.

I truly hope he does file a similar response!


What A Better Way to Break Up the Country

"Those who do not know history are destined to repeat it"

You REALLY need to hear these radio broadcasts before you think this is a good thing. The Constitution is not dead; it's just not being used right now.
The following is the archive page for Radio Broadcasting Network. Listen to the archives of the following two hosts; Ralph Winterrowd and Chris Hinkley.

Then listen to the Intelligence Report for 2-04-09

This is the SAME script that started the Civil War!!!

PyraBang for Liberty

PyraBang for Liberty

Sovereignty was the cornerstone to the Constitution!!!

Sovereignty was the cornerstone to the Constitution!!! Asserting sovereignty would not break the Union- though it would most definitely cast out those who've grown fat abusing the "Sovereign States" through powers, taken, but not yielded to the Federal government. The Union is a pact between our states, its an agreement that lasts as long as it is mutually beneficial to the citizens of the involved parties. I don't see it ever becoming non-beneficial, unless, the usurpation of powers continue or they cease to desist those already being abused. Which is exactly what has happened, and what will continue to happen, if we don't firmly reassert our sovereignty. This time we must redraw the lines not in plain black paint, but in bright flaming red so they will now and forever go unignored. This is not for the Union's detriment, but for its safety! Your worries are misplaced.
Knowing history would ultimately show you that sovereignty is what historically discouraged the Federal government from usurping powers not delegated to it. Ignoring any state's sovereignty, as happened just before the South seceded, is exactly what our Founders feared. After Abraham Lincoln reforged the union by force, usurping all state sovereignty with the unconstitutionally ratified 14th amendment, our country quickly ran down the path of rampant federalism. Even the leaders of the southern sates, if you choose a book outside of the public school history books, ultimately did not want secession. There are many southern political leader who made numerous public appeals to the Union, in regard to their suffrage of unfair heavy taxation- though it did little good. It was that very fact of disregarded sovereignty that lead them to leave the Union.
Read the speeches of by Jefferson Davis before his state seceded. They show he was reluctant to break with the country his forefathers had founded.
I ask you what does sovereign mean? And if the states are not sovereign what are they? Slave states?

Federalism is your enemy, not "State Sovereignty".

Even Hamilton, the ardent proponent of a strong central Federal government admitted in the Federalist that "It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the state governments will in all possible contingencies afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority."

Listen to the Radio Shows

It's not just about state sovereignty; but yours as well!!! Each person must also declare their sovereignty from this federal corporate "state" known as the United States. I'm not against taking away the powers that never belonged to the federal government to begin with; but you need to know about your own individual sovereignty as well. Listen to the radio shows, please, before you rush head long into a situation that is being created bby the same people who now own the corporation!!!

PyraBang for Liberty

PyraBang for Liberty

Okay fair enough. I'll listen to it and give you my opinion.

Okay fair enough. I'll listen to it and give you my opinion.

That same script is overbearing Federalism

This time it's Federalism x10000000000. They are forcing us to take action--not the other way around.

"There can be only one permanent revolution - a moral one: The regeneration of the inner man."

"The body is but a vessel for the soul,
A puppet which bends to the soul's tyranny.
And lo, the body is not eternal,
For it must feed on the flesh of others,
Lest it return to the dust whence it came.
Therefore the soul deceives and despises."

"State Soverignty" shall set us free.

The 10th Amendment......will give us teeth if we choose to bare them!!

For example:
Chisholm v. Georgia back in 1793.
Georgia openly declared that to submit to the jurisdiction of the Federal court would be to destroy the “retained sovereignty of the State". Under a barrage of demands by the Supreme Court for submission, Georgia maintained that they had no authority to command the sovereign state. Because of this Georgia's State Legislature bravely issued the famous bill which stated any Federal agent who attempts to enforce the Federal government’s order within the sovereign state of Georgia should “…suffer death, without benefit of clergy, by being hanged.” The situation however resolved -without Georgia backing down- before the bill was passed. However this outcome was because the Federal government, and the other states, recognized that this bill was a loaded gun which was ready to be fired should the issue be pushed. Georgia had every intention of passing and enforcing this bill. Because of the actions of the Federal government in this event, the sovereign states were compelled to adopt the Eleventh amendment. *That is just one of many battles where "State Sovereignty" has been wielded.*

This is why sovereignty needs to be reasserted- it is the true grounds from which our country was founded! If we reclaim that forgotten authority, our battle is practically won!