Lance L. Landon: U.S. States vs. Federal Government


Richard Moore

February 19, 2009 at 23:23:27

Firestorm Brewing Between U.S. States and Federal Government

by Lance L. Landon     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

States May Be Getting Ready To Dissolve Our Federal Government

Could this be an ominous shadow drawing on the end of the United States of America? For years the Federal Government has presumed to be the all-powerful force governing our country, but it just could be that the Federal Government only exists at the pleasure of the state governments and the citizens thereof. States declaring sovereignty sounds like an act of secession and revolution. However the federal government can apparently be dissolved and another one formed anew at the discretion of the states. The existing Federal government may not leave willingly like so many European governments that are replaced routinely and it may engage a military effort with our own soldiers or the likes of a Black Water illegal military invasion to retain total control over us.
United States Federal Government laws are often in violation of the Tenth Amendment, which is perturbing, these events. This is predicated on an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation, which states that, “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation [now Federation] expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”
A growing number of states are declaring their sovereignty afforded under the U S Constitution’s Tenth Amendment however the conventional news media are not telling you about what is happening. The State of Washington on Wednesday – 11 February 2009 and most recently, New Hampshire [2009], Montana [2009], Hawaii [2009], Michigan [2009], Missouri [2009], Arizona [2008], Oklahoma [2008], Georgia [1996], and California [1994] all of which have introduced bills and resolutions declaring and reaffirming their sovereignty. Some other states have done this in the past but then let the issue go. Additionally, the states of Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering similar measures. More well may follow, such as Wyoming and Mississippi. 
The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791 and states, “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.” Historically, this was done to reassert the assignment of the remaining rights to the states and the people of our country if they were not specifically delegated by our Constitution to the United States Government. Further, Amendment Nine on the Construction of the Constitution, Ratified on 15 December 1791 states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” 
The Arizona State Legislature is currently formulating a bill that declares their state sovereignty. Their bill further asserts their state’s right during martial law to call back servicemen to protect Arizona state, “…if the President or any other federal entity attempts to institute martial law or its equivalent without an official declaration in one or more of the states without the consent of that state …” There is more near the end of this article.
A lot of this recent activity has come about due to the reckless demise of the banking system now and also in memory of the past during the great depression that fomented during 1929. There is a Russian academic, Igor Panarin who recently predicted that the United States would break apart into about six separate regions by 2010. Predictions of similar persuasion have been made before, rather they are right or not some big problems may soon ensue.  
Much of the presidential character of the cabinet assembled by President Obama is representative of that of the previous administration. Obama perhaps is keeping the Adage, “keep your friends close and keep your enemies even closer.” A disrespect for our so-called leaders is met from our so-called leaders disrespect for us the citizens of our country. Should this be the case yet again, this would establish further reason for the states course of recent action
It may seem ironic that as we have a President from the land of Lincoln, and one who admires Lincoln, that another civil war could be brewing. It’s further ironic that states are beginning to fight back. Many individuals that were imprisoned by Abraham Lincoln for advocating their free speech on issues of the day. These times may be as exciting and revolutionary as when our country was beginning. Benjamin Franklin said something on the order of, “if we do not hang together, we most certainly will hang separately.” Its also ironic that our revolutionary war was with Great Britain and that the so-called Federal Reserve Board (The Banksters) is a corporate instrument of Great Britain, still engorging itself with our blood, our wealth and our money.
The state sovereignty issue was discussed on late night radio on Coast-to-Coast AM. Comments reflected by Alex Jones indicate federal misjurisdiction of its authority that is infringing on state matters and on individual rights. States formed this federal government and it may be disempowered by 34 states [2/3rds]. The Federal government may have disenfranchised itself by making treatise that subvert its powers. As such the Federal government may already be insolvent even though it’s still operating. There is mostly Republican, some Democratic and much nonpartisan sponsorship on recreating state sovereignty to resolve these issues. Take a look at these links: click here and here
Strings attached by the federal government to returning state money for federal programs may be invalid. States are rejecting federal intervention. Issues at hand involve the National Guard, Posse Commentates, and FEMA Prisons for events of rebellion [or civil demonstration] and revolution and a reimposition of the concept of establishing a North American Union. Take a look at Jerome Corsi’s book, “The Late Great USA”.
Federal negation of states’ rights is selling us out and is treasonous is among the repressive efforts against the states. States may dissolve this federal government. An effort in Missouri to push for sovereignty began three years ago when Missouri started to revive interest in its sovereignty. Other issues are 2nd Amendment Rights being taken away and the institution of civil disobedience, revolution and re-evaluation of where we want our government to go. 
Unfunded mandates are forcing issues that the states will block is just one of many issues at hand. The Federal Government essentially has succeeded from our union. PDD-51, part of The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, allows for martial law a lot too easily; this is really not in the best interest of the citizens of the United States. 
The negation of Congressional authority by the Executive branch is further ammunition for the states to declare their sovereignty. Congress has become a ceremonial branch of the government with no real power left. Congress has just given up its power by not reading the legislation it is being persuaded to pass hurriedly. Nobody in Congress seems to read the bills they pass. We must educate ourselves or suffer the consequences for lack of knowledge. Presidents have become front men for wealthier world powers.     
Generally all state resolutions and bills to regain states inherent rights are a perfectly legitimate concept. While succession could be a possibility, the dissolution of the entire federal government and the institution of a new one predicated mostly on our current one is a distinct possibility. 
It has come to the point where the banks are controlling Washington DC [or, is it the Bilderbergers as part of the new world order?]. Or is it just the old world order they are trying to recreate? The use of crises to terrorize us and promote a new world order, based not on what is good for us, but for them! Any world government that should arise must be democratic and not arbitrary. Actually, it is still the Old World Order that the new world order advocates guised in the remains of globalism misused. 
The primary Constitutional responsibilities of the Federal government are to control our borders, our currency and our military of which they are abdicating on all of these. Granted there is an enumeration in Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution providing for eighteen or so in total responsibilities and rights. Clause 18, considered the expansion or elastic clause states, “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” The union is already gone and America has been sold out to foreign banks. States have the right to dissolve the federal government in order to reconstitute it. There is a non-democratic globalist effort that is stealthily moving ahead with its plan for a world government and economy made in their image, not ours.
The Constitutional principle in the Tenth Amendment is reflective of Federalism in that by providing that powers not granted to the National government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states and to the people. In the Articles of Confederation, a precursor to our Federal Government today, “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”

Once our Constitution was ratified, many desired the addition of a similar amendment limiting the Federal government to powers to those “expressly” delegated; this would have denied the use of implied powers. These powers result under the Elastic Clause the Constitution. Those implied powers are powers not given to the government directly through the Constitution, but are considered to be implied in Section Eight of our Constitution. 
This document lets the government create Legislation and laws they considered necessary and proper so that they may remain in force, to meet as then or in the future unanticipated applications of the Constitution. The word “expressly” did not appear in the final version of the Tenth Amendment as it then was ratified.
Some state representatives on late night radio Coast to Coast AM were Matt Shea – WA, Jim Guest – MO, Dan Itse – NH, & Charles Key – OK provided a range of views on this subject.Click here. 
In response to increasing federal encroachment, a growing number of states have passed and proposed resolutions to assert the Tenth Amendment and the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.

The Declaration Of Independence states: “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government”

A new vision for America is in the works. This is not just about state sovereignty, but America’s Sovereignty. We will be rebuilding America in the image we want, not what outsiders want. We are not ending America, but providing it a new beginning.

Here in are some of the resolutions and portions thereof:
A small portion from the resolution in Arizona created in 2009: “Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring, that:
1.  That the State of Arizona 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 Constitution of the United States.
2.  That this Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
3.  That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.”

Each state’s resolution has some language that is about the same but also has more to say in many cases. The California Resolution initiated in 1994 reads thusly,

“WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

   “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 10th Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the United States Constitution and no more; and

   WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the 10th Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

   WHEREAS, In the year 1994, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

   WHEREAS, Numerous resolutions have been forwarded to the federal government by the California Legislature without any response or result from Congress or the federal government; and

   WHEREAS, Many federal mandates are directly in violation of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

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

   WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the United States Constitution; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and Assembly of the State of California, jointly, That the State of California hereby claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution and that this measure shall serve as notice and demand to the federal government to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers; and be it further

   Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President pro Tempore of the United States Senate, each Senator and Representative from California in the Congress of the United States and to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state legislature in the United States of America.”


While each State Resolution and/or Bill is written somewhat differently but expresses much of the same determination. New Hampshire has a rather interesting and long dissertation in its resolution, excerpted here are some poignant points, 
“That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government . . .”

Read the whole document