We are working hard here in Idaho to reclaim our sovereignty also. Do the Neocons on AMHD think this is a bad idea? I am sure you do so, I would like to hear why.
By the way Oklahoma, I am proud of you and my hat is off as I bow down before you.

Oklahoma State House of Representatives - House Votes (http://www.okhouse.gov/51LEG/Leg_Votesxx.aspx?include=okh01983.txt)

STATE OF OKLAHOMA
2nd Session of the 51st Legislature (2008)
HOUSE JOINT
RESOLUTION 1089 By: Key
AS INTRODUCED
A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the
Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States over certain powers; serving notice to the
Federal government to cease and desist certain
Mandates; and directing distribution.
WHEREAS, the Tenth 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 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 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as
Agents of 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 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 Constitution of the United States.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
AND THE SENATE OF THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 51ST OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:
THAT the State of Oklahoma 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.
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.
THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President
Of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the
Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker

Of the House and the President of the Senate of each state's
Legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the
Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.

Last month I heard another state is considering doing the same thing. They said they would no longer be a part of the USA if they take away gun rights. I think it was Wyoming.
I have been wanting to move to Az but seems like I am stuck where I am and waiting to see which states will not follow all these laws taking away our rights. I will be ready as soon as I know for sure which ones are for real on that!

I am in sympathy and support states asserting their 10th amendment perogatives . What has this to do with neocons?

If you don't know, (which you don't,) then little ole me can't tell you. I don't watch FAUX news tom. I get my news from many sources, sift through it and still wind up confused. Now that's a shame.

Well neocons are normally connected to foreign affairs so I don't see where 10th amendment considerations come into play . [for the record ;I spend much more time watching MSNBC when I watch televison at all if that has any bearing on this ] Why don't you with your ecelectic sourcing answer my question ?I would respond to your request for clarification.

Works for me, too and I also fail to see how this is strictly a neocon issue. Seems Oklahoma's beef is with the feds, period, "a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress." Previous administrations and congress implies a lot of contempt for Democrat policies as well.

Hello States Righters:

Does the State of Washington have the right to legalize marijuana? Does the state of California have the right to legalize gay marriage?

States rights are NOT all about abortion.

excon

I have been saying they should make California, Washington and some other liberal counties and states everything the liberals want with all the rights they want and the more conservative states with the rights they want. Then they can see what states prosper and what ones fall apart.

Washington has a medical marijuana law doesn't it ? I told you the problem with the California law. The fact is that people from all over the country are going there to get their Calif."marriage "license and then will return to their own state to challenge their States laws in court.

Do the people of California have a right to decide it ? They said no and the court said yes.

Hello States Righters:

Does the State of Washington have the right to legalize marijuana? Does the state of California have the right to legalize gay marriage?

States rights are NOT all about abortion.

excon


Ex, this was one was about the whole shootin' match, not just abortion, and seems to have been prompted over immigration laws (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67229).

I agree with Tomder that the problem is that the people go to the state that allows something and return to their state wanting it to be approved there.
Since states are wanting to make their own laws such as gay marriage.
Federal law should say that even if one state approves it that it is only for that state or even that states residents. They do it with the gun laws I am sure they could with most all the other laws if they wanted to.

They can't do that however . There is something in the Constitution called the "full faith and credit clause" that was put in to avoid the possibility of contracts in one state not being honored in others.

http://dictionary.law.com/definition.asp?selected=799&bold=%7C%7C%7C%7C

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

THAT is why Same Sex Marriage is NOT a state matter . It has to be decided nationally . Remember the wording of the 10th. It only applies to matters that are not given to the National government . A contract guarantee was deemed a national issue by the founders .

Anything that can has to be honored in other states should not be allowed by states then.
So I really don't see how they are getting away with the gay marriage thing.
They don't seem to follow any part of the constitution unless it suits their agenda

Washington has a medical marijuana law doesn't it ?Hello tom:

Indeed. A law which the federal government does NOT recognise.

excon

I guess it is okay as long as you don't blow smoke across state lines then you might have to double check the laws.

Agreed... again the issue is a conflict of competing "rights" . Your beloved SCOTUS ruled that the Federal Government's inherent right to regulate interstate commerce trumps the possession rights of Washingtonians. The ruling does not overturn the law ;Just said that the state law does not provide a defense if the feds decide a violation of the laws enforced by the DEA has been committed..

Do I agree with the decision ? Maybe ;but I certainly agree that at times the Federal Government and the courts have abused their authority of interstate commerce. Justice Stevens made it clear in his majority ruling that the remedy for pot heads is in US congressional action.

The most famous abuse of the clause of course was Roosevelt's New Deal policy that decided that a farmer could not grow wheat for personal consumption . Stevens concluded that the court was still bound by the decision that defined interstate commerce broadly to include, wheat farming. But Roosevvelt could do no wrong and neither can SCOTUS . Justice Thomas (the federalist in the court who you think is a dufus ) in dissent said if "the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives and potluck suppers throughout the 50 states."


Just curious ;How many Washintonians have been busted if they are following the State guidelines for the use of medical marijuana ? I bet none.

Do I agree with the decision ? Maybe.

Just curious ;How many Washintonians have been busted if they are following the State guidelines for the use of medical marijuana ? I bet none.Hello again, tom:

So, the state has the right to make pot legal, but the feds have the right to arrest those people that obey STATE law?? What kind of states rights are those?

Nope, you're wrong. The clinics who are distributing medical marijuana to patients pursuant to the law, ARE being arrested and closed down by the feds.

So, you righty's don't really believe in states rights, do you? You believe in the states rights YOU want them to have - nothing more. Something fishy about that. Course, you guys ARE fishy.

excon

The clinics who are distributing medical marijuana to patients pursuant to the law, ARE being arrested and closed down by the feds.



Yeah that seems to be the way it works anymore.
In my state you can buy fireworks, tinted windshield film over 80%, decorative car lights, etc... and you get a fine for using what you legally can buy. That doesn't even get into the can of worms of the conflicting laws

I said maybe in this case I am and maybe not . Interstate commerce is designated to the Federal government... am I correct ? I think I am .Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 So then it is a matter of judicial interpretation . No ;I don't think that States rights trump the enumerated powers of the Federal government . It is up to the States involved to make their case. In the case of Washinton and in cases in California I've read about Federal authorities tend to prosecute cases in which dispensaries are not in compliance with state law or in which there is some other aggravating factor. So I kind of doubt that the arrests were made when strict compliance to the State laws were observed . I know the game. Anyone walks in and claims to need it for medical purposes and the clinic gives them a perscription.. much like those idiot doctors who will give viagra to almost anyone claiming symptoms .Then the user tokes away and gets nailed driving a car and gets into an accident .

Owner of six US medical marijuana stores arrested - AOL News (http://news.aol.com/story/_a/owner-of-six-us-medical-marijuana-stores/n20080528034209990001)

Time to see the *Big Picture* you guys.

Our country is the titanic after it hit the iceberg(Presidential failure to address the imported oil situation after Carter), the lights are still on and the music is playing, but... we are going down fast without change.

... the Fascists(formerly Conservatives)don't want to make changes so that we can save America before it hits bottom.

Time to see the *Big Picture* you guys.

Our country is the titanic after it hit the iceberg(Presidential failure to address the imported oil situation after Carter), the lights are still on and the music is playing, but ......we are going down fast without change.

.....the Fascists(formerly Conservatives)don't want to make changes so that we can save America before it hits bottom.

Good point. It was actually George Herbert Walker Bush that put parts of the US coast line drilling ban in effect, and then the moratorium was further extended by Bill Clinton.

They just said on the news that Bush W is suppose to sign a bill that allows off shore drilling tomorrow. Hope I heard right.
I blame the environmentalists for us not being allowed to use our own oil.
They say that Colorado and Anwar has more oil than Saudi Arabia
So why do we bow to the environmentalists?

States lost that right long ago, anyone remember the civil war, that was a states right issue, they lost, federal government gained control and has only increased it ever sense.

They just said on the news that Bush W is suppose to sign a bill that allows off shore drilling tomorrow. Hope I heard right.
I blame the environmentalists for us not being allowed to use our own oil.
They say that Colorado and Anwar has more oil than Saudi Arabia
so why do we bow to the environmentalists?

If Dubya signs and lifts the moratorium his father initiated it would realistically give us a four year window of oil supply off the coasts alone. Car manufacturer's should be racing to take the opportunity for the coming supply and demand for alternative powered vehicles. Of course with inflation and stagnant wages, the cost of these new vehicles may be not be reasonably affordable or in the budget for the middle/lower classes.

Yeah Fr Chuck the South fought for the States rights to enslave people. It is arguments like yours that discredits the whole concept of States rights.