TOP PRIORITY: Push your State Reps to Introduce and Pass State Nullification Bills!

[FrankRep]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/stories/US_12-2009/2605-coverstory.jpg

State vs. Federal: The Nullification Movement
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/constitution/2957-state-vs-federal-the-nullification-movement

Nullification in a Nutshell
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/history/american/2971-nullification-in-a-nutshell



Does your state have Healthcare Nullification Bills yet?
Organize locally and get your state Reps to Introduce and pass them!
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/health-care/



Ohio as an Example:

Ohio Legislators Look to Nullify National Health Care
http://sovereign.ohiofreedom.com/wordpress/

Support Health Care Freedom Act - HJR 3 (House)
http://www.ohiofreedom.com/SLAM/issue.php?issueid=23

Support Health Care Freedom Act - SJR 7 (Senate)
http://www.ohiofreedom.com/SLAM/issue.php?issueid=21

[FrankRep]

Instead of worrying what THEY will do next, what will WE do next?

Lets be a little Pro-Active.

[FrankRep]

Kill the Bill, Invoke the 10th Amendment!

Tenth Amendment Center
21. Mar, 2010

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/03/21/kill-the-bill-invoke-the-10th/

[FrankRep]

Who's willing to help pass nullification laws in their state?

[payme_rick]

<<<--------------------

[MelissaWV]

Ten of the attorneys general plan to band together in a collective lawsuit on behalf of Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington.

Not a bad start.


In addition to the pending lawsuits, bills and resolutions have been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures seeking to limit or oppose various aspects of the reform plan through laws or state constitutional amendments, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

So far, only two states, Idaho and Virginia, have enacted laws, while an Arizona constitutional amendment is seeking voter approval on the November ballot. But the actual enactment of the bill by President Barack Obama could spur more movement on the measures by state lawmakers.

[GunnyFreedom]

The progressive controlled State Assembly in NC, waaaaay back in middle 2008 when it became clear that a Dem was going to win the Oval Office, swapped up the rules to prevent any legislation from being introduced in 2009 or 2010. Normally a good thing, but in this case we'd already have at least 3 nullification bills on the floor if not for this progressive dem tyranny. expect to see them in 2011, and (regardless of who initially sponsors them) two of them are mine, and one of them is about 25% mine.

This is an area in which I have been making HUGE gains in the NCGOP. No joke.

If I get into the House, the Energy Independence and Resource Freedom Act will be introduced by me personally -- it's the only one that I have not actively sought others to sponsor.

[ChaosControl]

Washington eh? That surprises me. Glad we're on board, but Seattle usually knocks any sense out of the state.

[Stary Hickory]

The progressive controlled State Assembly in NC, waaaaay back in middle 2008 when it became clear that a Dem was going to win the Oval Office, swapped up the rules to prevent any legislation from being introduced in 2009 or 2010. Normally a good thing, but in this case we'd already have at least 3 nullification bills on the floor if not for this progressive dem tyranny. expect to see them in 2011, and (regardless of who initially sponsors them) two of them are mine, and one of them is about 25% mine.

This is an area in which I have been making HUGE gains in the NCGOP. No joke.

If I get into the House, the Energy Independence and Resource Freedom Act will be introduced by me personally -- it's the only one that I have not actively sought others to sponsor.


No way to get this through sooner? I wish you the best of luck, get this done. You will get into the house, help the people stay free.

[dr. hfn]

Find your legislation!

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/health-care/

[Anti Federalist]

I love the idea, and fully support it...however.

The result is inevitable, the feds will decide this in their courts.

They will dismiss these efforts without even a hearing or trial, as having no standing, meaning the idea is too ridiculous for them to waste their time with.

"Of course the feds can enact and enforce this, what would make you think differently?"

My question is: what then?

[torchbearer]

I love the idea, and fully support it...however.

The result is inevitable, the feds will decide this in their courts.

They will dismiss these efforts without even a hearing or trial, as having no standing, meaning the idea is too ridiculous for them to waste their time with.

"Of course the feds can enact and enforce this, what would make you think differently?"

My question is: what then?

http://www.gloversvilleschools.org/gms/teachers/mgillis/Civil%20War%20Battle.jpg

[FrankRep]

My question is: what then?

Lew Rockwell and Tom Woods will give us direction if the Government tries to pull a sneaky trick.

Right now, get the ball rolling on the Nullification Bills.

[GunnyFreedom]

No way to get this through sooner? I wish you the best of luck, get this done. You will get into the house, help the people stay free.

The House Dems basically passed a rule in 2009 that said "2010 will be considered a "short" session, and no new legislation will be introduced during this session, period." Only old business and budget stuff.

I would be honored to serve in the State House and push the liberty/Constitutionalist agenda with every iota of my being. I will say that the math is hard to overcome, however.

I have the best opportunity to win this district of any Republican in a century, the race is handicapped at just about even if I get fully funded. My Dem opponent had $50,000 in receipts as of December 2009, and as of today I have received $3,999 in total.

About half of that total has come from RPF's.

If I can get 5000 people to give just $20 each, then I will literally be over-funded for my race at $100,000. Doesn't seem like that should be hard, does it? :)

Even if only 1000 people gave $25 each, I would pass my quarterly goalpost and start getting serious media attention. That would seem even easier.

Honestly, I can't thank the folks on here enough who have given. Right about 20 people from RPF's have together given right about $1900. That is more than their fair share of the burden, and it is simply not fair to keep asking the same 20 people to give again and again and again, when our biggest strength here is strength in numbers which OUGHT to make the burden a whole lot less for everybody.

But most folks here do not see my race as being all that important, or relevant to them. That's fine, I am OK with that, but I am not going to keep hitting up the same generous people just because they are more than their fair share of generous, just like I know that I am not going to win against a $100,000 candidate with $4,000 to spend.

That's just a natural part of the political process -- if the members of our movement do not see my race as important enough, then I am not going to win. I'll fight solid through to November with what I have, but I am wise enough that I recognize reality. I even consider it right and fair -- this isn't about me getting a seat or a job, tis is about whether we folks in the movement really want this seat representing us our not.

So far, only 20 of us on RPF's do, and only 35 of us outside of RPF's do. I'll fight tooth and nail until election day with whatever I get, but at the end of the day this is not about what I want to do, but what our community and movement wants to do. Our community wants US Congress, not State House. I get that, and I'm OK with that, even though personally I think it's a bad choice for 2010. This year, the real strategic victories will be in the State Assemblies, and if we are truly willing to cede those victories to the neocons and the liberals, well, we are just not going to get anywhere on our agenda. But again, that's our communities choice to make, not mine, I can only try and convince people how critically important the State House really is.

And I'm sorry, I've been saying this for a year now, in 2010 specifically, the State Assemblies are way more critical than the US Congress. Folks will either believe me or they won't. :)

[s35wf]

Here is a organization who is trying to get the word out regarding nullification.

http://fija.org/category/jury-nullification/

Start enlightening the people!

[GunnyFreedom]

I love the idea, and fully support it...however.

The result is inevitable, the feds will decide this in their courts.

They will dismiss these efforts without even a hearing or trial, as having no standing, meaning the idea is too ridiculous for them to waste their time with.

"Of course the feds can enact and enforce this, what would make you think differently?"

My question is: what then?

Did the Feds decide in their courts the question of the nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act? I don't think they did, and without that nullification movement, we would not have had the underground railroad.

Nullification has a couple important aspects. One, even without enforcement it puts pressure on the Federal government. This is the exact sort of pressure that Kokesh, Paul, Lawson, Shiff will desperately need if they want to make traction on our agenda on the Hill in 2011. Without nullification pressure coming from the States, they will simply be a tiny tiny minority without a real voice. However WITH nullification pressure, they may be a small minority but they will have "the voice of the people and the states" with them, and can leverage the majority around.

Two, electing a strong governor who will enforce nullification will give those acts teeth in the event that we do not send enough leverage up to our allies on the Hill.

[MelissaWV]

Here is a organization who is trying to get the word out regarding nullification.

http://fija.org/category/jury-nullification/

Start enlightening the people!

I think you're confused as to what this thread is about? :confused:

[Anti Federalist]

I think you're confused as to what this thread is about? :confused:

LOL I just caught that as well.

;)

[GunnyFreedom]

I think you're confused as to what this thread is about? :confused:

I think you are right ;)

[Anti Federalist]

Did the Feds decide in their courts the question of the nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act? I don't think they did, and without that nullification movement, we would not have had the underground railroad.

Nullification has a couple important aspects. One, even without enforcement it puts pressure on the Federal government. This is the exact sort of pressure that Kokesh, Paul, Lawson, Shiff will desperately need if they want to make traction on our agenda on the Hill in 2011. Without nullification pressure coming from the States, they will simply be a tiny tiny minority without a real voice. However WITH nullification pressure, they may be a small minority but they will have "the voice of the people and the states" with them, and can leverage the majority around.

Two, electing a strong governor who will enforce nullification will give those acts teeth in the event that we do not send enough leverage up to our allies on the Hill.

Yes, they did, they overturned the only state court to legally "nullify" the law:


In 1854, the Wisconsin Supreme Court became the only state high court to declare the Fugitive Slave Act unconstitutional, as a result of a case involving fugitive slave Joshua Glover, and Sherman Booth, who led efforts that thwarted Glover's recapture. Ultimately, in 1859 in Ableman v. Booth the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the state court

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Act_of_1850

But I'm not arguing what a positive direction it is.

As I've said a million times before, the ruling class is not going to go quietly into the night, all I'm saying is that there had better be some teeth behind these measures and the people supporting them, like myself, had better know damn well where this road is going to end.

The only thing that will prevent this coming down to a fight is the imminent financial collapse of the federal system.

[FunkBuddha]

Critter contacted. In Tennessee we passed the Senate version of the "Tennessee Health Freedom Act" 26 to 1. It ought to be easy to get through the house andI have no doubt Governor Bredesen will sign it.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

The FED gets to establish the rules on bankruptcy and that is the argument being made.

A SCOTUS ruling is a roll of the dice at best. The personal motives and finances of whoever gains standing to argue they should not have to purchase health care is going to be under the scrutiny of public opinion.

In my opinion the states holding a constitutional convention has better odds than winning a SCOTUS ruling.

[Juan McCain]

By claiming health care a "right" the Dims shot themselves in the foot - they make the arguement themselves for nullification -
proper addition of a right requires constitutional amendment.

So get the Supreme Court to rule if this new "right" to healthcare can be required of everyone only by a simple majority legislation
(along with an attached Executive order hocus pocus) without any states ratification of a constitutional amendment.

The Supreme Court needs to hear the states argue that they must nullify since this new "right" was created without a constitutional amendment.