OpenMarket.org has a troublesome article about the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009. This reminded me of the lead in toys bill that passed recently. It seemingly has such broad language that all kinds of unsuspecting people could become unintentional criminals. If I understand it right, this bill would give government officials the right to confiscate your car and other property until you are found innocent. And what would be the "crime" that you would be accused of? Picking up rocks and keeping them. I know, I know. It is scary stuff. Here is a quote from OpenMarket.
According to Tracie Bennitt, president of the Association of Applied Paleontological Sciences, the bill’s language is so vague and the penalties such as forfeiture so severe that it could allow the government to “put scientists in jail and confiscate university vans.”
Among the problems, critics explain, is that the language is so broad that merely picking up rocks under this bill could be found guilty of “excavating” or “removing” a “paleontological resource.” There are numerous rocks, stones, and other objects of nature that contain fossilized imprints and, in the bill’s language, “are of paleontological interest and that provide information about the history of life on earth.” In fact, it is likely the most rocks that people pick up would meet this definition.
One of those consequences is the civil forfeiture provision in Section 6308, which would leave those accused without their cars or other property until the trial was completed — basically the property would be guilty until proven innocent.
This craziness has already passed the Senate as S 22. Call, e-mail, or fax your Rep. before Wednesday and tell them to vote no.
Stuff like this makes me think we should limit the length of laws to a readable amount. Seriously, who could think this is a good idea if they actually read it.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Texas State Sovereignty Bill
After my previous posts about State sovereignty bills, I contacted my State Representative to see if such a thing was in the works in TX. I received a response the next day saying that they had gotten many e-mails similar to mine and that a couple of days ago, a State sovereignty bill was introduced to the Texas House of Representatives. So I found it online and read it. Here are some snips.
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, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment
means that the federal government was created by the states
specifically to be an agent of the states; and
WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated
as agents of the federal government; and
WHEREAS, Many federal laws are directly in violation of the
Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States;
RESOLVED, That this 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 these
constitutionally delegated powers
I like the Montana one more because it actually enumerates some of the things that the bill is talking about. I am glad that Texas is taking these measures. As with the other states, will the follow through be there?
UPDATE:
It looks as though there is a second resolution about State sovereignty here in Texas. Here are sections of it. I like this one more because it is more specific.
WHEREAS, The Constitution of the State of Texas declares that
Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the
Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free
institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the
preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to
all the States
WHEREAS, The 50 states composing the United States of America
are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their
general government but by a compact, described as "a Constitution
for the United States of America
WHEREAS, The Constitution of the United States delegated to
Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities
and current coin of the United States, piracies, felonies committed
on the high seas, offences against the law of nations, slavery, and
no other crimes whatsoever; it being true as a general principle,
and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared,
that "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," therefore all acts of
Congress that undertake to create, define, or punish crimes, other
than those so enumerated in the Constitution, are altogether void
and of no force; the power to create, define, and punish such other
crimes is reserved, and of right appertains, solely and exclusively
to the respective states, each within its own territory;
that in cases of
an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the general
government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would
be the constitutional remedy, but where powers are assumed that
have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful
remedy;
It goes on to list some specific things that are unconstitutional: Being required to joined the armed forces in a time of peace, being required to do public service (except in lieu of jail time), infringement of freedom of speech, infringement of freedom of religion, and infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.
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, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment
means that the federal government was created by the states
specifically to be an agent of the states; and
WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated
as agents of the federal government; and
WHEREAS, Many federal laws are directly in violation of the
Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States;
RESOLVED, That this 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 these
constitutionally delegated powers
I like the Montana one more because it actually enumerates some of the things that the bill is talking about. I am glad that Texas is taking these measures. As with the other states, will the follow through be there?
UPDATE:
It looks as though there is a second resolution about State sovereignty here in Texas. Here are sections of it. I like this one more because it is more specific.
WHEREAS, The Constitution of the State of Texas declares that
Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the
Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free
institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the
preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to
all the States
WHEREAS, The 50 states composing the United States of America
are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their
general government but by a compact, described as "a Constitution
for the United States of America
WHEREAS, The Constitution of the United States delegated to
Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities
and current coin of the United States, piracies, felonies committed
on the high seas, offences against the law of nations, slavery, and
no other crimes whatsoever; it being true as a general principle,
and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared,
that "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," therefore all acts of
Congress that undertake to create, define, or punish crimes, other
than those so enumerated in the Constitution, are altogether void
and of no force; the power to create, define, and punish such other
crimes is reserved, and of right appertains, solely and exclusively
to the respective states, each within its own territory;
that in cases of
an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the general
government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would
be the constitutional remedy, but where powers are assumed that
have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful
remedy;
It goes on to list some specific things that are unconstitutional: Being required to joined the armed forces in a time of peace, being required to do public service (except in lieu of jail time), infringement of freedom of speech, infringement of freedom of religion, and infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.
40 Days for Life Spring Campaign
40 Days for Life is not doing a Spring Campaign in Fort Worth this year. :( I still plan to spend time in prayer against abortion during the next 40 days.
The campaign starts today and goes through Easter. There are 135 towns participating this time. You can click here to see if yours is one of them. I was really glad that I participated in the one during the fall. Go public and spend some time praying for abortion to end in your community.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Both Barrels
Tammy at Education Conversation came back from a week with no posts with both barrels loaded. She has some strongly worded thoughts about the State education of Christian children that is worth reading and pondering if you are brave enough.
Meanwhile, Montana has gotten out its word pistol by joining six or so other States with sovereignty bills. Here are some of the interesting (to me anyway) parts.
8 (4) That the federal Constitution and Bill of Rights delegated to Congress a power to punish treason,
9 counterfeiting of the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, felonies committed on the high
10 seas, offenses against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes.
11 (5) That all acts of Congress that assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those
12 enumerated in the federal constitution and Bill of Rights, are void and of no force.
That all acts of Congress that abridge freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press
21 are not law and are void.
22 (10) That power over the freedom of the right to keep and bear arms was reserved to the states and to
23 the people, allowing states the right to judge how far infringements on the right to bear arms should be tolerated,
24 rather than allowing that exercise to be defined by Congress.
(21) That any act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United
18 States, or Judicial Order of the United States that assumes a power not delegated by the federal Constitution and
19 Bill of Rights diminishing the liberty of this state or its citizens constitutes a nullification of the federal Constitution
20 and Bill of Rights by the government of the United States, which would also breach Montana's "Compact With
21 the United States". Acts that would cause a nullification and a breach include but are not limited to:
22 (a) establishing martial law or a state of emergency within a state without the consent of the legislature
23 of that state;
24 (b) requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war or
25 pursuant to or as an alternative to incarceration after due process of law;
26 (c) requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than
27 pursuant to or as an alternative to incarceration after due process of law;
28 (d) surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government;
29 (e) any act regarding religion, further limitations on freedom of political speech, or further limitations on
30 freedom of the press;
Really the whole thing is interesting and I encourage you to read it yourself. The question that remains to be seen is whether they are actually going to follow through with actions.
As I mention in a comment on Tammy's blog (mentioned above). . .
It is hard enough to write these things. It is harder still to say them aloud in front of people. And hardest of all is to take action.
Meanwhile, Montana has gotten out its word pistol by joining six or so other States with sovereignty bills. Here are some of the interesting (to me anyway) parts.
8 (4) That the federal Constitution and Bill of Rights delegated to Congress a power to punish treason,
9 counterfeiting of the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, felonies committed on the high
10 seas, offenses against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes.
11 (5) That all acts of Congress that assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those
12 enumerated in the federal constitution and Bill of Rights, are void and of no force.
That all acts of Congress that abridge freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press
21 are not law and are void.
22 (10) That power over the freedom of the right to keep and bear arms was reserved to the states and to
23 the people, allowing states the right to judge how far infringements on the right to bear arms should be tolerated,
24 rather than allowing that exercise to be defined by Congress.
(21) That any act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United
18 States, or Judicial Order of the United States that assumes a power not delegated by the federal Constitution and
19 Bill of Rights diminishing the liberty of this state or its citizens constitutes a nullification of the federal Constitution
20 and Bill of Rights by the government of the United States, which would also breach Montana's "Compact With
21 the United States". Acts that would cause a nullification and a breach include but are not limited to:
22 (a) establishing martial law or a state of emergency within a state without the consent of the legislature
23 of that state;
24 (b) requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war or
25 pursuant to or as an alternative to incarceration after due process of law;
26 (c) requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than
27 pursuant to or as an alternative to incarceration after due process of law;
28 (d) surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government;
29 (e) any act regarding religion, further limitations on freedom of political speech, or further limitations on
30 freedom of the press;
Really the whole thing is interesting and I encourage you to read it yourself. The question that remains to be seen is whether they are actually going to follow through with actions.
As I mention in a comment on Tammy's blog (mentioned above). . .
It is hard enough to write these things. It is harder still to say them aloud in front of people. And hardest of all is to take action.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)