BREAKING: Sarah Palin Signs Alaska Sovereignty Resolution..

BREAKING: Sarah Palin Signs Alaska Sovereignty Resolution.. https://2img.net/h/i383.photobucket.com/albums/oo276/jessduntno/Untitled-2.jpg

Posted on 13 July 2009
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/13/palin-signs-alaska-sovereignty-resolution/
by Michael Boldin

On Friday, July 10th, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin signed House Joint Resolution 27 (HJR27), sponsored by State Rep. Mike Kelly. The resolution “claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.”

The House passed the resolution by a vote of 37-0 (3 not voting) and the Senate passed it by a vote of 40-0.

Six other states have had both houses of their legislature pass similar resolutions - Tennessee, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma and Louisiana - Alaska joins Tennessee as the second to have such a resolution signed by the Governor.

A GROWING MOVEMENT

Passage of this resolution appears to be part of what is now a growing state-level resistance to the federal government on various levels. Similar 10th Amendment resolutions have been introduced in 37 states around the country, and various states are considering single-issue legislation in direct contravention to federal laws.

Most recently, the Arizona Legislature passed a measure for public approval on the 2010 state ballot that would give Arizona voters the opportunity to nullify, or opt out, of any potential national health care legislation.

Since 2007, more than two dozen states have passed legislation refusing to implement the Real ID act of 2005. In response, the federal government has recently announced that they want to “repeal and replace” the law due to a rebellion by states.

Pending legislation in states around the country also includes preventing state law enforcement officials from enforcing federal laws, refusing federal gun regulations, refusing to send a state’s national guard to any duty other than what the constitution authorizes, legalizing marijuana for various purposes and more.

A FIRST STEP

While HJR27 is strongly-word in support of the principles of limited, constitutional government that the 10th Amendment represents, it is a Joint Resolution and does not carry with it the force of law. But supporters say that this is an important first step to get their message out not only to grassroots supporters, but to the media, and legislators in other states as well.

Read the final version of the resolution below:

Relating to the Sovereign Powers of the State

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA:

WHEREAS the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States 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”; and

WHEREAS the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS some federal actions weaken states’ rights protected by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS the Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp; and

WHEREAS art. IV, sec. 4, Constitution of the United States, reads, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” and the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”; and

WHEREAS the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S.Ct. 2408 (1992), that the United States Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS all states, including Alaska, find themselves regularly facing proposals from the United States Congress that weaken states’ rights protected by the Tenth Amendment;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature hereby claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

COPIES of this resolution shall be sent to the Honorable Barack Obama, President of the United States; the Honorable Joseph R. Biden, Jr., Vice-President of the United States and President of the U.S. Senate; the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives; the Honorable Lisa Murkowski and the Honorable Mark Begich, U.S. Senators, and the Honorable Don Young, U.S. Representative, members of the Alaska delegation in Congress; all other members of the 111th United States Congress; the presiding officers of the legislatures of each of the other 49 states; and the governors of each of the other 49 states.

While I probably do “get it” more than most in the lower forty-eight since I was once a resident of Alaska, this fixation over Palin and her supposed “conservatism” in the larger U.S. sort of baffles me. The eccentrics in Alaska didn’t elect, in Palin, a conservative per se, they elected a fellow eccentric. I mean, what kind of “conservative” names her children after Alaskan foliage? C’mon!

Nonetheless, it used to be my opinion that Alaskans were “too independent” of the nation, their independency and eccentricity (or “rugged individualism”) being closely related. But that is no longer the case. Let them have their eccentrics; that’s what the state is largely about. But at the same time, let’s keep Sarah Palin in perspective. She’s an eccentric, not a conservative. That she’s a woman with five dependent children, and that she has, by her own choice, a job as all-consuming as a governorship of a state (any state) is enough said on the subject.

While I could never possibly agree with her feminist promoting “absentee momism” irregardless of what she claims to be, I do support her decision to add her signature to this resolution. Just remember, though, as an eccentric from an eccentric state, she’s doing so for largely different reasons than folks in the lower forty-eight are.

Funny that Terry Morris, above, should natter on, and on, about naming children after plants… has she ever heard of Rose, or other popular names? TM reminds me of the “‘flower-children”‘ of the 60s… CRITICAL OF EVERYONE WHO DOESN’T FIT THEIR MOLD.. (while we’re at it, recall some of the monkiers those drop-outs hung on their kids!!)True to her liberal background, she assumes the privilege of deciding what people should, or should not, name their kids.. and just about everything else they do…. GIVE US A BREAK!! (could be, the 60s were TOO GOOD TO HER) So, Terry, you couldn’t “”cut it”" in Alaska, that’s no reason for being bitter about people who are successful and love their state!
As a true Conservative, I’m usually not given to parsing out advice to the ‘mentaly challenged’ but I would suggest that Terry GET A LIFE!