Friday, February 6, 2009

State Sovereignty Resolutions Introduced

Legislators in at least nine States have had it with Federal meddling! They have therefore introduced resolutions asserting the sovereignty of their States in the current session, which began last month. Those States are Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, and Georgia. Twelve additional States reportedly are considering the introduction of such resolutions: Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois (!).

These States are claiming their rights under the Tenth Amendment, which reserves all powers to the States or to the people, that are not specifically delegated to the Federal Government under Article I, Sections 8-10 of the Constitution.

Since events are moving rapidly, I have added a link list to the right column after the RSS links, so you may access the text of each State's resolution and check its status.

I am working behind the scenes to get such a resolution introduced here in Ohio.

Virtual buckeyes to and Stephen Hopkins at the Ohio Freedom Alliance.


Anonymous said...

i see you mention you are trying to get a resolution introduced here in OH legislature - i agree 110% that we need to get OH on the bandwagon!

is there someway we can help to do this - are there "key" people we should write/call in the state house or senate about this issue? if there's preferred way more of us can help, please post instructions on the site.

Harold Thomas said...

I am working on a draft that I would like to fly by a sympathetic attorney and some others; and I have some ideas on contacts.

I very much appreciate your interest, and expect to be ready to announce answers to your questions later this week.


Anonymous said...

thanks, look forward to any way we can help - with so many states now doing this, we definitely don't want to be left out! time to draw the line in the sand...

Anonymous said...

Does this initiative, i.e. States' rights under the Tenth Amendment, point or lead towards in any way re-visiting the Con-Con initiative in Ohio?

I ask within the following context: a Con-Con being triggered is two States shy of proceeding; it is not necessarily a given that a Con-Con will work to the States' advantage.

In other words, from where I sit, the notion of a Con-Con needs to be analyzed with very clear eyes to determine who might be playing whom and to whose advantage.

I stand to be clarified and/or corrected re relationship between States' rights initiatives and Con-Con.

Harold Thomas said...

The initiative does not point in the direction of revisiting the Con-Con -- they are not related.

If the Con-Con is revisited in this session of the General Assembly, those who favor state sovereignty will oppose it, for the reasons I have described elsewhere.

Barga said...

WHile I disagree with the idea that any state has the right to leave, I do not understand why this would help our state out

Harold Thomas said...

Leaving would help our State out!

However, since you disagree with that idea, I have a question for you. Read the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. If the Federal Government violates these amendments, how else can they be enforced?

While you're at it, take a look at Federalist #39, especially the paragraph that begins "That it will be a federal and not a national act" and tell me what it means to you.

Barga said...

Does not say that there are more rights, just that there COULD be

Harold Thomas said...

Okay, you read the Ninth Amendment, what about the rest of my question?


Barga said...

fyi, history paper up on wed. cause i know you love them

To counter it, i think that the 14th made it national

PhreedomPhan said...

I definitely think you would be interested in the information on regionalism that I have in my lostliberty blog. It gives some of the history of the federal governments deliberate incursion on the rights of the states with the eventual aim to eliminate then along with our local governments.

Feel free to use anything there. No "credit" is necessary. If you want to send it to representatives supporting this go right ahead. I would do it myself, but my home computer is down and I'm using the library computers. This limits my time and I don't have access to everything I'd like.

If I understood one comment correctly, it was understood at the formation that States had the right to secede. An attempt was even made in the Senate around 1850 to amend the Constitution to prohibit it. Buchanan recognized the right to secede. When you get right down to it, the "Revolutionary War" has been misnamed. The government of England was not overthrown, we simply seceded from the Empire. It should be known as the Secessionary War.

BTW, I suggest you refer to the "Anti-Federalist Papers" rather than the Federalist whenever possible. It was men like Methacton Smith, Jefferson, and Richard Henry Lee that forced the inclusion of the Bill of Rights that temporarily delay the centralized tyranny designed by Hamilton and the economic royalists who usurped the "Federalist" name from the true Federalists.

18th Century Liberal
21st Century Reactionary

Anonymous said...

I'm from Ohio and I back this up 200%!!!!!!!!!Get this out!I sent something about New Hampshire over to my Rep. and haven't heard anything!

sariwat1 said...

21 States Declaring Sovereignty:

Anonymous said...

It’s about time. I for one would be glad to see the Federal Government loose its power. I am sick and tired of being taxed to death and angry my right to possess arms is infringed upon. I live in NY and NY is one step away from being a dump. I feel all states should succeed from the union and refuse to pay federal taxes.
Read the Tree of Liberty Letter : “What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”
Jefferson to Smith 1787

Anonymous said...

Harold, got everything you're looking for. Please contact me at

Terri Dewell said...

I have posted your site on, team sarah ohio group, patriotic resistance ohio group, and america c2c, and emailed to friends! I am wanting this 100%, Thank you!

Anonymous said...

I am behind this 100%!! Lakewood here representing! Please let us know when you send this so that we can contact our reps and get behind this! Thank you!!

Harold Thomas said...

The resolution that is posted at will be the one we will be using for now (possibly with an additional paragraph that appears on the original Oklahoma resolution that adds a bit of punch to it, but is not a secession trigger).

If you live in a House district represented by a Democrat that might be interested in sponsoring a resolution, give them a call and please contact me now

We know that "Democrat" and "State sovereignty" are a tough package to bundle, but only a Democrat can introduce a resolution that can pass the House. Possible selling points for Democrats would be to remind them of the Federal role in our State's budget problems, and the effect of Federal "No Child Left Behind" mandates on Ohio's educational system.