Recently in 10th Amendment Category

This breakout session was hosted by Gary Wood and Ken Ivory of Heritage Training Center in Salt Lake City.

Ken Ivory, incidentally, is running for a seat in the Utah House of Representatives after having beaten Republican incumbent Steven Mascaro in the 2010 Primary Election. He’ll be going up against Democrat candidate John Rendell in November.

This session began with a simple question: “What is the greatest check and balance?”

The answer: “States’ rights” or Federalism.

There’s a lot of information here, I’m probably just going to include my notes verbatim with some added commentary.

Voices of influence

John Dickinson - “In short, the government of each state is, and is to be, sovereign and supreme in all matters to relate to each state only. It is to be subordinate barely in those matters that relate to the wholel and it ill be their own FAULTS, if the several states suffer the federal sovereignty to interfere in the things of their respective jurisdictions.”

Ivory added, “The states are CRITICAL constitutional actors.”

Thomas Jefferson: “I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid of this ground: That ‘all powers not delegated to the US by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people.’ To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.”

One person commented: “You hear ‘Commerce Clause’ and ‘Supremacy Clause’, except Clause is spelled C-L-A-W-S.”:-)

What is the federal government?

“Actually the federal government is a combination of the one centered in Washington and those located in States for it is this combination that constitutes the federal system.” — Felix Morley, Freedom and Federalism

Federal government or Federation; government of a unit of states in which sovereignty is divided between a central authority and component state authorities.

Changed meanings of words in 1787. Federal vs anti-federalists

“The federal and State governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes.” — James Madison, Federalist 46

Double-security. Different governments will control each other.

Are we supporting federalism or are we supporting nationalism?

How is ‘separation of powers’ divided?

Horizontal separation consists of three distinct branches (legislative, executive, judicial)

Federalism - states are where experiments are done. Case in point: Massachusetts was the experiment of the 3 branches of government.

Vertical separation of powers: National and state governments

Who holds sovereignty under our federalist republic?

Is there sovereignty at the national level?

Where is sovereignty at the state level?

Stephen Pratt says this is absurd.

“You have a ‘just claim’ to your life but that doesn’t mean you’re invincible.”

What level of sovereignty do the people retain?

Was the 10th amendment issue settled after the Civil War?

A common assertion is the principles outlined in the 10th Amendment no longer hold true due to the victory of the North over the South.

10th amendment is still on the books, still keystone.

Is secession the issue of the 10th amendment?

“We don’t want to secede. We want our country back. We want our general government operating appropriately.”

Madison “If Congress can apply money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may establish teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of the public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the union, they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post roads; in short, every thing from the highest object of state legislation, down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.”

Do states, as sovereign partners in United States, still hold the power to interpose between the people and the general government?

Is the general government supreme based on supremacy clause?

The constitution, and the Laws and the laws of the US which shall be made in Pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which shall be made… — Article VI, Sect 2

What is the Doctrine of Interposition?

Official action of the state government on the part of the state govt to question the constitutionality of a policy established by the central govt.

A resolution of Interposition, like that of Kentucky and Virginia of 1799, can result in the nullification of legislation deemed unconstitutional by the States or States.

Using interposition or nullification is like putting a proverbial ‘finger in the dam’ while the cause of the breach requires further investigation and solutions. It is a useful tool yet not the ultimate solution usurpation.

Nullification — Thomas Woods “Not a silver bullet.”

If I don’t take it, someone else will

One of the presenters illustrated a concept with this story: A little girl sees a bicycle she wants in a store window. To raise money to buy the bicycle, she does bake sales, lemonade stands, babysitting, anything she can do to earn the money. When she finally has enough money, she puts her piggy bank in her wagon and pulls it to the store. Along the way, the wagon hits a bump and the girl’s bank falls out of the wagon. The girl, excited to buy her bicycle, fails to notice the bank is no longer in the wagon, and continues on.

A bystander says to himself, “If I don’t take it, someone else will.”

This is often the rationalization for accepting money from the federal government.

We’re bringing in $200B, we’re spending $300B.

We must commit, in our own homes, to resist govt handouts and to be self-reliant.

I had meant to get this out a lot sooner, but then our neighborhood nearly burned down. That set me back a couple of days.

I had the fortune of attending the first ever Utah Freedom Conference on Saturday, 18 September held at the Radisson Hotel in downtown Salt Lake City. Things outside and around the hotel were made more interesting by the fact The Dew Tour was going on across the street.

There was a prayer breakfast held beginning at 7:30, but I didn’t attend that. I showed up in time for the main 8:30 meeting in the Ballroom. Rod Arquette, the new “live and local” guy from KNRS welcomed everyone. I was really looking forward to hearing more from Rod as I’ve become quite enamored with his show since they started running it in the afternoons (4-7pm), but that was pretty much the last we heard from Rod.

The Freedom Conference was being financed, apparently, by Bert and Kathy Smith (of Smith & Edwards fame, my dad told me).

Bert Smith spoke after Rod Arquette, mentioning the talk that Stephen Pratt gave at the breakfast, which I did not attend. He garnered some applause after simply stating “We want our local lands back.”

Kathy Smith, Bert’s wife, then recognized the host committee.

There was mention of “Milestones of Freedom,” which describes what immigrants experienced going through Ellis Island. I’m afraid my notes don’t mention what exactly this is, a book, a video, or what. Maybe someone can help me identify this.

Carl Wimmer, the official Master of Ceremonies for the event, talked about being prepared to defend the Constitution. Carl was followed by an invocation.

Christina Lowe, Miss Utah 2010, sang an amazing version of the national anthem without any musical accompaniment at all.

Jason Chaffetz

Our amazing congressman, Jason Chaffetz, spoke next. He spoke of the reverence he has about serving as congressman. He mentioned he was able to lead discussion in congress for the Republican leadership the previous Thursday about the Constitution

“People like to talk about separation of church and state,” Chaffetz said, but went on to point out that without God, we fail to be the great country we’ve been. We are “United under God.”

Jason quoted Abraham Lincoln and said our founders were rooted in an understanding our liberties are God-given.

Some metrics Congressman Chaffetz shared:

• We are $13T in debt, not counting unfunded liabilities.
• This is $5-600M dollars/day in interest.
• In comparison, the state budget of Utah is $10-11B
• Since Obama took office, more than 130,000 new federal workers have been added to the payroll.

Jason also expressed his admiration for George Washington and mentioned that at the height of power, he could have done whatever he wanted. He chose to walk away. He understood power was not vested in him, but “We The People.” The nation didn’t need one particular person to lead them.

Chaffetz also said he is very encouraged that support for Freedom is brewing, even in congress. To illustrate this, he mentioned that a fellow congressman wants to pass a resolution to support of the tenth amendment.

In conclusion, Jason read a couple excerpts from George Washington’s Farewell Address citing separation of power and the Constitution’s amendment process.

Bill Howell

State representative Chris Herrod introduced Bill Howell.

Bill Howell started by recounting an experience he had listening to a liberal talk-radio host who couldn’t understand why people say “We want our country back.” Perhaps people who feel we are losing our country aren’t expressing their beliefs with sufficient clarity, he suggested.

Howell explained that the federal government should obey the Constitution, but this demand is too general. We need to be more specific and detailed.

He added that it’s even difficult to single out a specific Constitutional principle, that the Constitution is a “fabric” or akin to a mathematical formula. If you change one thing, lots of things change.

His example was the 17th amendment which changed how US senators were elected. This affected the states’ voice on judicial appointments, treaty ratification, and more, not just the composition of the Senate chamber.

Howell spotlighted one principle he feels should be given more attention: State territorial sovereignty. He talked about some historic court cases to illustrate how state territorial sovereignty has changed over the history of the country.

Some key points made by Howell:

• Federal govt is not defined by territory
• Founders valued state sovereignty. Point: D.C. limited to 10 square miles
• Constitution opposed to unlimited power in any hand.

“Who understands constitutional principles in detail sufficiently well enough to defend them?” Howell asks. Good point. We should all become more familiar with the Constitution and the principles behind it to the point we can defend it.

Chris Herrod

I don’t know much about Chris Herrod, but I did videotape a townhall meeting he participated in about a year ago where he spoke about the dangers of socialized medicine. His wife is a legal immigrant from Russia and they’ve had some experiences first hand with state-run medicine.

In his address to the Utah Freedom Conference crowd, Herrod spoke of the Patrick Henry Caucus, the 77 oil leases that were pulled by the federal government right after Obama became president.

“People of Utah are actually not free,” he said. “There is undue influence of the federal government on the state.”

Stephen Sandstrom

Stephen Sandstrom is best known right now for introducing a new bill that go before the Utah Legislature in 2011 regarding illegal immigration. Some priceless quotes he delivered included:

• “We should only welcome the immigrant who will assimilate.”
• “Illegal immigration is a brick in the melting pot that will never melt.”

Karen Budd-Falen

Karen Budd-Falen is apparently a long-time friend of Bert and Kathy Smith and an attorney who has lots of experience dealing with property rights issues.

“Daniel Webster didn’t create the first dictionary so y’all could spell better,” she said, indicating that the first Webster’s Dictionary was intended to help the masses understand the language of our nation’s founding documents.

“The Constitution doesn’t give you rights. God gives you rights,” she added.

Budd-Falen’s time was spent mostly highlighting her experience fighting Western Watershed, an environmental activist group that allegedly intimidates and litigates ranchers.

It’s interesting that the federal government does not track the money it gives to environmental groups to turn around and sue the federal government.

In 9 years, for 9 environment groups, the federal government gave 36 million dollars to fight the federal government. Not including settlements.

Using the legal system, Western Watershed extorted $22 million from El Paso Corporation, to specifically eliminate livestock grazing.

But there was no environmental change after the Ruby Pipeline coughed up the $22M.

“It’s really stressful when an environmental group sues to end your livelihood,” Budd-Falen added.

Dan Byfield

Dan Byfield is from Texas and spoke on Coordination, a strategy for local leaders to fight against federal encroachment and other issues. His claim to fame is stopping the “Trans Texas Corridor” project that would have built a huge international highway through the middle of the country.

Dr. Michael Coffman

Michael Coffman, author of “Rescuing a Broken America”, began his speech talking about two competing worldviews that have been prevalent for centuries:

• The Skowsen/Jefferson worldview, established on the philosophies of John Lock. Alsao known as “People’s law”
• The Feudal-Ruler model, established by Jean-Jacues Rosseau, father of modern European socialism and communism

“Arizona lawsuit is extremely important from this perspective,” Coffman said, in proving the Federal Government is sovereign over the states.

Coffman quoted Bastiat, which is nice to hear.

Finally, Coffman illustrated what Thomas Jefferson and others have been warning us against for hundreds of years: The more power the federal government has, the more people clamor to have their voice heard by government (lobbyists, special interests) and the more division there is as one group of people vies for power over another group of people.

Thomas Pratt

Thomas Pratt was the next speaker of the morning session. His presentation was polished and rehearsed and included a synchronized slideshow.

Thomas Pratt’s website is AmericanLibertyVideo.com.

Pratt asserts that state sovereignty and national sovereignty can not co-exist, that there is no such thing as “dual sovereignty” or “mixed sovereignty.”

Pratt’s presentation went by so fast (he was short on time), I only have nuggets of notes from it. Rather than expounding on each of them, I’ll include them verbatim as I typed them up.

• Albert Taylor Bledsoe - National Fed govt vs Sovereign states
• Unitary republic vs republic of republics
• Able Parker Upshur - ~1840
• Walter Neal - The Sovereignty of America
• Declaration Of Independence - 13 nations unitedly declared independence.
• Delegation vs Cede power from the states to the Fed. govt?
• Convention of States.
• The Republic of Republics - by Bernard Janin Sage
• Madison - Each state is a sovereign body, independent of others.
• Compact between the states, not between fed govt and the states.
• “This leads to the solecistic absurdity.”
• Dual sovereignty, etc.
• Think of sovereignty as pregnancy. You either are or you’re not.
• Jefferson - Maintain free, sovereign independent states.
• August 14, 1866 - Nationalists declare victory - Andrew Johnson
• The insurrection against the supreme authority of the nation has been suppressed.
• After that - states were just administrative agencies carrying out the work of federal govt.
• “By arrogation of power…”
• Tenth amendment is the foundation of the nation.
• Either the Constitution means something or it means nothing.
• Nullification by Thomas E. Woods
• View of the Constitution of the United States - St. George Tucker
• Necessary that every man knows his own rights.
• Washington added to oath: “So help me God.”
• Roy Moore - “So help me God.”
• There is indeed a cause, and God is waiting for His people to stand in faith — to let the light shine in on the darkness.

Congressman Rob Bishop

Rob Bishop began by teaching a little history. Progressive era politicians, he said, didn’t like the Constitution because it prevents them from doing “great and marvelous things.”

Bishop pointed out that the federal government has grown under both Republican and Democrat control. Why is the federal government always going to grow? he asks. “Because it’s rigged in their favor.”

The solution is “individual liberties.” Not many people in public schools know what “individual liberties” means.

We’re talking about BALANCING power between states and the federal govt.

Maybe under federalism, you don’t have fewer programs, but you have power with the people and you have choices.

Rob Bishop was a far more dynamic speaker than I remember him being. I probably shouldn’t be surprised, though, considering he was a school teacher for many years. He clearly knows how to command an audience.