States Rebellion Pending
Opinion Editorial by Walter E. Williams -
Apr 6, 2009
48 ratings from readers
The idea of states' rights was one of the founding principles behind our nation, and is a major guarantor of our freedom. Those rights have been waning in recent decades, but there are signs this may start to change.
Our Colonial ancestors
petitioned and pleaded with King George III to get his boot off their
necks.
He ignored their pleas, and in
1776, they rightfully declared unilateral independence and went to
war.
Today it’s
the same story except Congress is the one usurping the rights of the
people and the states, making King George’s
actions look mild in comparison.
Our constitutional ignorance —
perhaps contempt, coupled with the fact that we’ve
become a nation of wimps, sissies, and supplicants — has made us
easy prey for Washington’s
tyrannical forces.
But that might be changing a
bit. There are rumblings of a long overdue re-emergence of Americans’
characteristic spirit of rebellion.
Eight state legislatures have
introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth
and 10th amendments to the U.S. Constitution; they include Arizona, Hawaii,
Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.
There’s
speculation that they will be joined by Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine
and Pennsylvania.
You might ask, “Isn’t
the 10th Amendment that no-good states’
rights amendment that Dixie governors, such as George Wallace and
Orval Faubus, used to thwart school desegregation and black civil
rights?”
That’s
the kind of constitutional disrespect and ignorance that
big-government proponents, whether they’re
liberals or conservatives, want you to have. The reason is that they
want Washington to have total control over our lives.
The Founders tried to limit
that power with the 10th Amendment, which reads: “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.”
New Hampshire’s
10th Amendment resolution typifies others and, in part, reads: “That
the several States composing the United States of America, are not
united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General
(federal) Government; but that, by a compact under the style and
title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments
thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes,
delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each
State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own
self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes
undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no
force.”
Put simply, these 10th Amendment resolutions insist that the states and their people are the
masters and that Congress and the White House are the servants. Put
yet another way, Washington is a creature of the states, not the
other way around.
Congress and the White House
will laugh off these state resolutions. State legislatures must take
measures that put some teeth into their 10th Amendment resolutions.
Congress will simply threaten a state, for
example, with a cutoff of highway construction funds if it doesn’t
obey a congressional mandate, such as those that require seat belt
laws or that lower the legal blood-alcohol level to .08 for drivers.
States might take a lead explored by Colorado.
In 1994, the Colorado
Legislature passed a 10th Amendment resolution and later introduced a bill titled “State
Sovereignty Act.”
Had the State Sovereignty Act
passed both houses of the legislature, it would have required all
people liable for any federal tax that’s
a component of the highway users fund, such as a gasoline tax, to
remit those taxes directly to the Colorado Department of Revenue.
The money would have been
deposited in an escrow account called the “Federal
Tax Fund”
and remitted monthly to the IRS, along with a list of payees and
respective amounts paid.
If Congress imposed sanctions
on Colorado for failure to obey an unconstitutional mandate and
penalized the state by withholding funds due, say $5 million for
highway construction, the State Sovereignty Act would have prohibited
the state treasurer from remitting any funds in the escrow account to
the IRS.
Instead, Colorado would have
imposed a $5 million surcharge on the Federal Tax Fund account to
continue the highway construction.
The eight state legislatures
that have enacted 10th Amendment resolutions deserve our praise, but their next step is to
give them teeth.
Walter E. Williams
is a professor of economics at George Mason University in Fairfax,
Virginia. He has authored more than 150 publications, including many in
scholarly journals, and has frequently given expert testimony before
Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor
policy to taxation and spending.