Free Markets, Free People

North Dakota’s “Secessionist” Resolution

What to make of this trend? I think Oklahoma got the 10th Amendment push-back ball 10th-amendmentrolling, Montana advanced the ball several yards, Texas got into the game recently (albeit, too glibly), several other states are getting their shots in, and now North Dakota takes it’s turn.

The resolution in the North Dakota legislature asking the federal government to begin recognizing the 10th amendment and to stop overreach into state matters, the one the Fargo Forum wrote off as being part of a “secessionist movement, has passed in the Senate. By a strictly party-line vote, unfortunately, meaning not one Democrat in the legislature had enough respect for the sovereignty of North Dakota to vote for it.

[...]

The resolution now goes to the House, where I expect it will also pass. Also, I’m guessing, by a strictly party-line vote. Which, if it happens, would be a small bright spot in an otherwise dim legislative session. It takes a certain level of conviction for politicians to vote for a resolution like this one. Would that the Republicans voting for it now had the courage of those convictions when faced with legislation that grows spending and government in the state.

At Say Anything, Rob Port has a copy of a state Senator Joe Miller‘s speech in support of the resolution from the Senate floor. I recommend you go there and read it.

Does it limit the feds, or not?

Does it limit the feds, or not?


Combined with some Governors rejecting portions of the stimulus funds, and the Tea Parties breaking out all over the country, I’d say it’s a good sign that people are finally telling Washington to take a hike. Personally, I would say that both Porkbusters and the Sunlight Foundation are owed some credit as well, but either way it’s about time that the federal government was reminded of its place. Granted, it’s a fairly small reminder, but maybe one that can be built upon.

So where does all of this lead anyway. Is there any hope that all of this momentum will lead to less federal government interference? How about some support for repealing the 17th Amendment? I’d like to think that it will end up reducing the size of government (i.e. electing fiscally conservative representatives who will cut taxes and greatly slash spending), but once that horse left the barn, the barn was burned to the ground and a giant spending dance was done on the smoldering ashes. Nevertheless, is there some small ray of hope that the states will rein in our profligate Congress?

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

8 Responses to North Dakota’s “Secessionist” Resolution

  • Okay, that’s it.  It’s over.  Nighty-night, Republic.
    Bring on the Empire!

  • It would have been nice to see the GOP membership get this pissed off in the prior 8 years, but tribalism always seems to trump everything else.  Likewise, we’ll spend the next 4 years hearing nary a squeek from the DEM membership about all of Obama’s transgressions.  Tribe first, country second.

    • Agreed.  As I’ve said before, people tend to “pick a side and stick to it.” 
      I choose…America!

  • Combined with some Governors rejecting portions of the stimulus funds, and the Tea Parties breaking out all over the country, I’d say it’s a good sign that people are finally telling Washington to take a hike

    You know what a good sign would be?  Not reelecting 95%+ of all the incumbents to Congress.

    Believe it when I see it

  • Nevertheless, is there some small ray of hope that the states will rein in our profligate Congress?

    Maybe, but I doubt it.  The problem is that there is a well-entrenched entitlement mentality in our country.  At the very least, in manifests itself as a squishy sort of do-gooderism: well-intentioned people read about the misfortunes of others and immediately think that Uncle Sugar ought to do something to help.  At the worst, many people have their hand out for some reason or another, ranging from healthcare to welfare to unemployment insurance to college loans to bailouts for their companies.  Additionally, politicians know that getting elected depends on bringing home the bacon, which means spending; politicians don’t get much credit (or votes) from their constituents by NOT getting money for roads or bridges to nowhere or teapot museums.

    So, when TAO promises to pass out flippin’ great wads of cash, he’s only doing what many people want and expect.  And, honestly, he’s doing the same thing that his predecessors did, only on a much grander (or destructive, depending on your perspective) scale.  This is why the GOP really has little credibility when it opposes his spending plans; they racked up deficits and added to the debt with reckless spending when THEY were in charge, too.  It’s sort of like the old joke about a woman refusing to have sex for $20 but agreeing to do it for $1 million: “we’ve established what you are; now we’re just haggling over the price”.

    Unless and until we can change the prevailing mindset in the country to one that refuses to use the government as a charitable institution, we’re not going to change the destructive course of increasing debt, increasing taxes, increasing government interference, and DECREASING liberty.  The most we can hope for is to go a bit more slowly down the path to ruin.

  • As soon as someone argues that a state has the right to secession, he or she should be educated about the Republic of Winston. Rejecting another’s claim of authority over you is a good thing, and there’s no reason for it to stop at the state or county level.

    • “Rejecting another’s claim of authority over you is a good thing, and there’s no reason for it to stop at the state or county level.”

      Hallelujah. Testify.