Wisconsin's 10th Amendment Resolution

Senator Liebham has kindly provided me with the text of his proposed resolution regarding the 10th amendment for Wisconsin and his aid, Mr. Werwie has assured me that I may publish it here. Without further ado, here is the text of the resolution.

2009 − 2010 Legislature SRM:wlj:phLRB−0927/1
"2009 − 2010 LEGISLATURE2009 SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION

Relating to: state sovereignty.

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 U.S. Constitution and no more; and

Whereas, as the scope of power is defined by the Tenth Amendment, the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

Whereas, today the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

Whereas, the legislature has forwarded to the federal government numerous resolutions opposing federal encroachment on state powers but has received no response or result from Congress or the federal government; and

Whereas, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

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

Whereas, a number of federal proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the U.S. Constitution; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the senate, the assembly concurring, That the state of Wisconsin hereby claims sovereignty 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 U.S. Constitution; and, be it further

Resolved, That adoption of this resolution does not constitute an application by the legislature of the state of Wisconsin for the calling of a federal Constitutional Convention within the meaning of Article V of the U.S. Constitution; and, be it further

Resolved, That this resolution shall serve as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers; and, be it further

Resolved, That the senate chief clerk shall provide copies of this joint resolution to the president of the United States, to the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, to the presiding officer of each house of each state legislature of the United States, and to each member of this state’s congressional delegation.(END)" (Emphasis in bold is mine)

"Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no." ~Exodus 16:4

Kudos To Sheriff Lott

After returning from SD, I decided to catch up on the news and this caught my eye.(Yes, women do occasionally read the Sports page.)
There was an article by AP columnist Jim Litke making fun of Richland County, SC Sheriff, Leon Lott for doing his job.
Apparently Sheriff Lott is attempting to build a case against Olympic champion Michael Phelps for smoking marijuana at a party and Mr. Litke feels this is ridiculous and over the top. In his words: "If Lott genuinely believes that Phelps is a danger to Richland County, somebody needs to sit him down and explain the meaning of prioritizing. "
Mr. Phelps' attorney also makes light of the matter , saying:"It seems to me that Richland County has a host of it's own crime problems much more serious than a kid featured in a photograph with a bong in his hand."
I beg to differ.
First, Mr. Phelps is not a kid. He is an adult. Twenty three years old = adult.
Second, he is a role model. The Saturday Night Live joke quoted in the article where a parent should answer a child's queries about why they can't smoke pot when Michael Phelps does may be funny, but it is inappropriate. (The answer was "right after you win 12 gold medals")
Third, this sort of moral relativity is at the heart of our country's troubles today. We have a standard of behavior here. It is called the law. It is the duty of citizens to uphold the law and to condemn those who break it.
Mr. Litke says"While there's no condoning what Phelps did, " and then goes on to explain why he does condone what Mr. Phelps did. "..if anybody has the right to blow off some steam, it's him. Phelps has been in the pool nearly every day since age 7." Then he cites some of the consequences Mr. Phelps has already suffered for his lapse in judgment as further reasons why he shouldn't be subject to Sheriff Lott's persecution.

This article disturbed me. I have spent a bit of time volunteering with children and one of the things I teach them is the meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance. When we get to the lines "with liberty and justice for all" I have a little exercise I do with them. I say that phrase means that the law applies to everyone equally.
Then I set up a scenario for them:"We have a law against littering here. If Thomas(my son-who served as my den chief) and I are walking down the street and we both litter and a police officer sees us both, to whom should he give a ticket?" They usually get that one right. Both of us. Then I say what if the mayor and I were walking down the street and we both litter? Sometimes they have trouble with that one. They almost always have trouble with it when I name a celebrity or if I say the other person is a big businessman with lots of money. The point is, that I reassure them that the law applies to everybody equally in this country-or at least it's supposed to.

Now I would like to ask Mr. Litke, "At exactly what point did Michael Phelps transcend his subjection to the laws of the USA in your opinion?"

I'd like to know. Was it when he reached a certain number of hours of hard work? There are guys out there working 60-80 hour weeks to pay their bills who have been doing so for longer than Mr. Phelps has been alive. Should they get a free pass too?

Does this law transcendent status result from the winning of a gold medal? Does everyone with a gold medal get to consider themselves above the law or do they have to win more than one? Just what would that magic-the-law-no-longer-applies-to-me number be?

Is it celebrity perhaps? My son has a following of older folks who show up for open mic nights on the chance that he might be there playing piano. The benefit concert he put on for his Scoutmaster got him an interview on satellite radio and one of his school projects caused him to be interviewed on camera for a television show intended for Japanese schoolchildren. Is that celebrity enough for him to smoke pot without fear of legal repercussions? Maybe he can speed now that he has his license.

Do you see where I'm going here? Simply because you have a soft spot for someone or find some of their achievements admirable does not mean that they should no longer be subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

I say kudos to Sheriff Lott. How would it help the crime rate in his county if he ignored a blatant, publicized instance of lawbreaking where the guilty party can be easily found upon whom to enforce the law? I'm assuming Mr. Phelps did not bring the marijuana to the party, which means someone else, who has access to the drug dealers of Richland County did. It is Sheriff Lott's sworn duty to press charges against Mr. Phelps and anyone else who broke the law at that party. It was Mr. Phelp's civic duty, not only to refuse the drug, but to report whoever offered it to him to the police himself. The only message criminals in Richland County should be taking from his actions is the message that no one is above the law here.

I don't have any idea how Sheriff Lott handles the rest of his duties, but in this instance, he's right on target.
So, kudos to you, Sheriff Lott and shame on you Mr. Litke for eroding the values and standards that uphold the republic.
"My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not." ~Proverbs 1:10

Follow-up to the note.

I am back in town, but with a friend. The flu decided to join us for our trip home and I am not at my best.
This morning, I received a reply to my interest in matching New Hampshire's resolution 6 from the other half of my legislative representatives, my senator.
Here is his reply:

"Thank you for contacting me recently with your support for state’s rights.

I appreciate that you took the time to bring this resolution to my attention. I introduced a similar resolution last year but, unfortunately, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics and Government Reform has not allowed a hearing on the bill. I plan to re-introduce the proposal in the next few weeks in order to renew this effort. We need to pull back our power and responsibilities from our federal government.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please contact me again if I can provide additional information or answer any questions."

I have asked him to provide a link to the text of that proposed resolution, and I will publish it here as soon as I receive it.

"And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear. "~Exodus 32:18

Just a Note

I, upon reading of New Hampshire's Resolution 6, immediately wrote to my own state legislators requesting a similar measure. As I will be out of town for a few days, I thought I would post his response here to encourage those who may not have felt it worthwhile
to contact their own legislators.

"Thank you for forwarding a link to the resolution introduced in the New Hampshire legislature. This document has gotten considerable attention, and I have been sent copies from several sources in recent days. Although the current majorities in the Wisconsin legislature are not likely to embrace such a resolution, I am discussing with colleagues the possibility of introducing a Wisconsin version regardless of majority support.

The federal government has repeatedly usurped the constitutional authority of individual states, and grown government control far beyond the framers intent. I will watch with interest the progress of this initiative in the New Hampshire legislature."

"Then three thousand men of Judah went to the top of the rock Etam, and said to Samson, Knowest thou not that the Philistines are rulers over us? what is this that thou hast done unto us? And he said unto them, As they did unto me, so have I done unto them." ~Judges 15:11

Character Counts

Why do we have such problems finding good people to serve in positions of leadership in this country?

I've heard it said that "Character is what you do when no one is looking." The implication being that if your behavior in public is consistent with your behavior in private, then you have strength of character. In my opinion, character is only one half of the equation when we are considering to whom we should give our votes. Character may be what you do when nobody is looking, but leadership is what you do when they are. Character in private does nothing for those who would otherwise be strengthened by your actions. Leadership is crippled when it is not accompanied by good character.

That said, I ask again, why do we have such problems finding good people to serve in positions of leadership in this country?

I submit to you that it is because We the People have become lazy and lacking in discernment. We have before us, in these last months three wonderful examples of what happens when lack of character meets lack of discernment.
I shall start with Mr. Franken.

Mr. Franken gained the endorsement of his party(political parties are despicable things which tend to distract people from the real job of choosing a candidate by providing an "easy button", but I digress.), ran a campaign, and, when the result of the vote was close, asked for a recount. These are all reasonable actions for someone seeking political office.
The recount, however, has been fraught with bias and irregularities. This is where one expects a person of character to show their true colors. One would expect Mr. Franken to issue a statement saying that until he, himself along with the people of Minnesota are satisfied that the election results and recounts are true and without bias or irregularities, he would refuse to accept the seat. Has he done so?

Next up is Mr. Burris.

Mr. Burris was appointed to a senate seat by a man under investigation for corruption, specifically corruption regarding the sale of that particular seat. What man of character would accept any position of authority under such a cloud? Doing so can only serve to cast suspicion on one's entire life and career and bring shame to one's family. And yet, Mr. Burris has not only accepted the seat, but has engaged in legal wrangling to frustrate the well intentioned attempts of Congress to deny him the seat under these conditions.

One challenges the good people of IL (I know there are some good people in IL) to recall Mr. Burris as soon as can possibly be arranged and likewise a challenge to the good people of Minnesota in regard to Mr. Franken. If We the People want people of good character to be our representatives, then we must start doing what is necessary to make such a change. That starts with refusing to allow those of demonstrated poor character to continue serving past such demonstrations. It continues with making an active effort to find people of demonstrably good character to fill those seats.

I refer you to http://www.primarychallenge.org/ for a starting place. This is a site asking for folks to help them identify RINOs and find the names of good people to challenge them in your state's primary elections. (RINO = Republican In Name Only- I am not a republican, I am a conservative but I support the notion of replacing those who are not representing their constituency's wishes in this manner as a good start - you liberals will have to find your own site)

You are probably asking yourself who the third example is. I would ask you to examine the actions and words of Mr. Obama. He promised transparency and yet has spent significant amounts of money to avoid verifying that he is Constitutionally qualified to sit as president when a minimal fee would have sufficed to remove the challenges to his election. With this refusal, he plunges our country into a Constitutional crisis and jeopardizes the careers of every serviceman and woman in our military. This has been made to seem a small matter, something of no consequence, ridiculous even. But how arrogant and disrespectful of the American people is it to take the office of POTUS with such an easily addressed question unresolved?
I challenge the American people to really look at this man's actions and words over his lifetime. You tell me if this is a man of good character. Be prepared to defend your position.

For the next election cycle, I challenge the people of America to disregard the admittedly biased mouthings of the MSM and research the candidates yourselves. Vote, not by party, but by principle. Be guided not by the mouthings of talking heads and celebrities but by the dictates of your own conscience and common sense. Do not sympathize with those who have failed morally, or allow the lecherous, drunken or fiscally unsound private behaviors of someone requesting to serve as our leader to be glossed over but rather demand good character and adherence to high moral standards from those we put into positions of leadership. We are better than that. We need leaders who exemplify the standards we want our nation to adhere to who can demonstrate them to the world. We have the God given freedom to do so, but with freedom comes responsibility. This is not someone else's job-it is ours, individually.

"And the LORD said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee." ~Numbers 11:16

Where's my bailout? Wisconsin, New Jersey, Ohio, Massachusetts and New York

Well, now we know the plan by which our esteemed governor plans to make up the budgeting shortfalls of past decisions come back to haunt us. He's going to ask the Feds to cover them.

That's right, Mr. Doyle, along with the governors of 4 other states is asking the federal government for a bailout. How do you like that Hawaii? How about you Texas? Oklahoma? I can just tell you have all been dying to send your tax dollars to Wisconsin, New Jersey, Ohio, Massachusetts and New York, because we weren't willing to scale down our budgets and live within our means.

I don't think the founders would approve. In fact let's look at what Mr. Jefferson had to say.
"It is not by the consolidation or concentration of powers, but by their distribution that good government is effected. Were not this great country already divided into States, that division must be made that each might do for itself what concerns itself directly and what it can so much better do than a distant authority. Every state again is divided into counties, each to take care of what lies within its local bounds; each county again into townships or wards, to manage minuter details; and every ward into farms, to be governed each by its individual proprietor… It is by this partition of cares descending in gradation from general to particular that the mass of human affairs may be best managed for the good and prosperity of all.”

Mr. Doyle, your job is not to go, hat in hand, to Washington to seek relief, but rather to manage what you have here. My family is feeling the pinch of tough times through our own choices too, but we are doing our best to handle it without resorting to bankruptcy.

I expect leadership from you. It is not Alaska's problem that Wisconsin has eyes bigger than it's stomach and the good citizens of Indiana shouldn't have to pay for our mistakes. Stay here and do what's necessary to make our budget balance. No, it won't be pleasant or make you popular, but that's the price of being introduced as the Governor of Wisconsin. You have brought shame on every citizen of this state by your actions. Shame on you.

"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."
~Proverbs 22:7

Happy New Year

Wishing you all a very Happy New Year.

As I enter this new year I find myself thinking of a quote from former president, Ronald Reagan:

“The character that takes command in moments of crucial choices has already been determined by a thousand other choices made earlier in seemingly unimportant moments. It has been determined by all the ‘little’ choices of years past—by all those times when the voice of conscience was at war with the voice of temptation, [which was] whispering the lie that ‘it really doesn’t matter.’ It has been determined by all the day-to-day decisions made when life seemed easy and crises seemed far away—the decision that, piece by piece, bit by bit, developed habits of discipline or of laziness; habits of self-sacrifice or self-indulgence; habits of duty and honor and integrity—or dishonor and shame.”

May we all look to our small choices that our crucial ones will be those that we would have them be, to be the sort of people our children can respect and emulate.

" Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding: whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest they come near unto thee. "~Psalm 32;9