The 10th amendment to the Constitution of the United States is quickly becoming one of the most important issues among the citizens of the United States today. The "State Sovereignty Movement" has gained traction in at least 40 states, regardless of whether the state is considered to be "red" or "blue." This amazingly quiet mass movement points to a time honored American tradition, that no matter which way one leans politically, in this country we are highly skeptical of a massive federal government, generally speaking.
The State of Nebraska Sovereignty Resolution is still in petition form but according to its creator, Gregory Boyle, momentum to push this resolution into our state's legislature is increasing. According to Mr. Boyle, "there are several state reps. that are verbally committed to forwarding this resolution." None of the representatives referred to by Mr. Boyle have publicly announced their support as of yet.
The full interview with Gregory Boyle, (in Q&A format), can be read below.
The 10th amendment to the Constitution of the United States clearly says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Given that the Constitution is the Supreme law of the land, the 10th amendment ought to lend much credibility to the State Sovereignty Movement.
To read and/or sign the Nebraska State Sovereignty Resolution Petition, visit http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/nebraskasovereignty/.
Q: How did you create the State of Nebraska Sovereignty Resolution?
Boyle: The basis for this resolution as well as Arizona’s and a couple of others grew out of Oklahoma’s. I included articles from the Nebraska Constitution that were relevant.
Q: What is sovereignty, exactly?
Boyle: The definition of sovereignty is a simple one: Freedom from external control. The exercise of supreme authority within a limited space. That limited space would be the State of Nebraska in this case.
Q: Why do you feel this type of resolution is necessary?
Boyle: It must be stated up front that this is a non-partisan issue. The reaction of some during the last administration and the Patriot Act was the beginning of sovereignty resolutions in some states. The current administration has accelerated the spread of federal intrusion into state and individual sovereignty at an alarming rate. Proposed gun regulations since the Brady Bill and the new push for socialized health care under this administration are examples. Global warming initiatives and their regulatory effects on business. Federal involvement in Chrysler and General Motors, the federal bailout of the entire financial system, and federal regulation of executive pay, the list is increasing daily. Warren Buffet, and thus Berkshire Hathaway received a sweet heart deal during the financial bailouts. What control does that give the federal government in the largest corporation in this state?
Q: Is this resolution intended to act retroactively?
Boyle: The resolution does not need to be retroactive since the powers we seek to assert have rested with the citizens and the states since the ratification of the Constitution (of the United States). Over the years we have simply deferred power to the federal government since, for the most part it has been financially expedient to do so. Helmet and seat-belt laws are tied to federal highway funding, and curriculum in schools are tied to federal education funds, and so on.
Q: What federal usurpations of power does this resolution seek to abolish?
Boyle: Once the states decide to reassert the power that has always rested with them under the Constitution, all federal rules and regulations are on the table for litigation under the 9th or 10th amendments.
Q: Does this rhetoric not constitute sentiments of secession from the union?
Boyle: I have found that some people do not understand the difference between sovereignty and secession. Sovereignty is the right of the states, under the federal constitution of the United States of America and has nothing to do with a state wanting to leave the union.
Q: What type of support has this resolution garnered from the public?
Boyle: I have attended several rallies and parades around the Metro area over the last couple of months. I always run out of informational material before people stopped asking for it.
Q: Why do you think this is the case?
Boyle: The fundamental right of Americans to make decisions for themselves and their communities bridges any political philosophy or economic status.
Q: What financial burdens has the federal government placed upon the citizens of Nebraska.
Boyle: The previous Mayor of Omaha signed a city version of the Kyoto Protocol, and the consumers have paid the price. Companies that need to spend more money to adhere to federal or even international standards simply pass costs on to consumers. The federal burden of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are all passed on to the consumer. EPA and CAFE standards for the automobile industry are again passed on to all of us in the cost of the next vehicle we buy. The financial burdens on the state are few to my knowledge since it is the desire for federal funding that drives states to defer power to the federal government.
Q: Would you say that the federal government is exercising a form of extortion over the states?
Boyle: This breaks down into a simple analogy. The federal government has become the bully on the playground. You are new at a school, and the big kid offers you protection for some of your lunch money. The school is large with many students and you feel alone, the big kid’s offer seems a small price to pay. As time goes on, the big kid and his buddies keep raising the price for protection. You then make friends with many other kids, and you are no longer threatened by them; in fact, they are in the same boat with the bullies as you are. Any time a kid wants to stop paying there are consequences, from only the bullies. At some point, you and your classmates band together to assert rightful powers over the bully. The bully receives a bloody nose, and you are responsible for your own protection on the playground. This is the price of freedom. In the past Americans have always been willing to pay the price for their individual liberties.
Q: Do you think that average Americans understand the concepts of our freedoms or the wisdom of our Constitution? Why or why not?
Boyle: (No). The education system has been the central problem since the early sixties. Once again it was federal dollars for lunch programs for the poor. It was a good Christian thing to do, it seemed. Once federal funds found their way into the schools we kept bowing to federal education guidelines. Today our kids learn more about alternative lifestyles and global warming than they do about the founding of this nation. It is time that we get more people to vote in a national election than vote during a season of American Idol. The sovereignty resolution is the first step to asserting our constitutional right of states and citizens power over the federal government.
Q: What do you believe will be the outcome of the State Sovereignty Movement?
Boyle: It is hard to say. If the vast majority of states assert their sovereignty, then the federal government will be restrained by Constitutional law. The ramification will be the crushed ambitions of socialist politicians’ who’s desire it is to run the country from Washington D.C. Instead, the states may be responsible for more of the cost of local projects that will be deferred by the cutting out of federal taxes for programs that are found unconstitutional like federal health care, insurance, energy taxes, and future or past bailouts of private entities.
Q: What can people do to support this movement or sign your petition?
Boyle: Nebraskans can contact their representatives to ask them to support the Sovereignty Resolution. They can also just point and click at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/nebraskasovereignty/ . Here they can sign the petition for free and lend their voice to the growing chorus that supports sovereignty across the entire country.
Comments
Seems to me there are more than one of you in NE with 2 different petitions saying the same thing...is this good or bad? Combine them into one petition, or is the idea to send more than one to get the message across? So, we (the people) need to sign them all?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!