The question I ask coming out of this election is how will the GOP read it? The election was spun by the left as a referendum on healthcare and that is exactly what won it for Brown. The people of Massachusetts came out in droves to vote against Obama’s plans to extend control over 1/7th of the US economy in the guise of healthcare reform. GOP leadership is of course ecstatic over the victory and they should be (heaven knows it’s been a while since good news involved the GOP). The danger to those of us who value freedom is a misread of Brown’s victory by party elites.

If party leadership reads this victory to mean people are so fed up with the Democrats they will vote for anyone wearing the Republican moniker the potential for big wins in 2010 will be lost. The Republican Party lost big in the last round, not because the country had shifted left, but because the Republican Party had shifted left. Under Bush it was hard to tell a Republican voting record from a Democratic one. Keynesian deficit spending alongside rampant Congressional corruption and moral turpitude produced a perfect storm for the left. The left won because the right stayed home.

It may be possible for the GOP to go one cycle or perhaps two with the old practice of running RINOs and Rockefeller Republicans. It is possible the electorate, shocked by the abuses of a strong Democratic majority, will vote for any elephant walking down the street, but this will not last long. Unless the party of Reagan returns to its base it will find itself exiled from power again and again. If this happens it is not the Republican leaders who will suffer but the American people who are forced to watch more and more of their freedoms wheedled away by misguided apparatchiks.

At one time the federal government was seen as limited. Now under the liberal junta currently running this nation the states are being reduced to branch offices of Washington. This was never envisioned by the founders who saw our nation as sovereign people in several sovereign states joined together and pooling part of their sovereignty in the federal government. King Obama and his Hip-Pocket Congress are working to sieze control of American lives and the American economy far beyond anything King George would have imagined. If you think healthcare has a problem now, wait until it becomes a government program–emergency room meet Post Office and DMV.

The programs and philosophies of our nation’s current administration and legislature would be right at home on the campus of Berkley and in the hallowed halls of Sacramento. Discouragement of business, attempts to saddle the free market with draconian controls and welfare programs designed to encourage dependency are just a few symptoms of the California flu spreading to other states and to the US Capital. The nanny state, distrust of individuality and inane attempts to ’spread the wealth’ leave one unsurprised at the tongue-in-cheek People’s Democratic Republic of California, or the oft heard “Left Coast.”

For too long Californians have allowed their democratically elected leaders to play social engineer and to design a state that is incompatible with individual freedom, all in the name of progress and social ‘justice.’ Unfortunately, the infection of other states is compounded by California’s own ineptitude. As people flee for their economic life, little do they realize that they carry the seeds of destruction to lay waste to their new home state. As they miss social programs and benefits they once enjoyed in California they steer the democratic process to institute these, never realizing they are recreating the failed system they fled. I have lived in the Western US all of my life, except for a brief time stationed on the East Coast in the Army. I have observed this pattern of Californicating all through the west.

Fear of Obama’s plans for this country have inspired many states to rightly reassert their rights under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution and these Constitutional questions are reviving talk of secession. I would propose a solution that would be far easier. Why not kick California out of the Union? Those who have created this monstrosity of a state would no longer be US citizens and unable to foul our political system. We are currently building a fence along the border with Mexico. Would it be too expensive to make a right turn and continue it to Oregon?

Of course only certain parts of California are the source of the radical political effluent. Most of the idiocy is along the coast from San Francisco south to San Diego. This is easy to handle by division. We could handle California like Virginia during the Civil War. The counties of Northwest Virginia chose to remain with the Union. They were severed off from the rest of the state and a new state of West Virginia was born. Let’s do this with California. The coastal left-leaning regions would be cut loose to form their socialist mecca (within a few years we could buy the land cheap from the survivors), while the rest of the state would be reconstituted as a replacement. Of course the name should reflect the historic act. Perhaps we call it Free California.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Those elected to represent a congressional district answer to their people first (as the sovereign body) and then to the people’s document—the Constitution. The founders knew a strong central government was needed to deal with foreign nations and ensure a strong union between the states, but they feared a federal government without restrictions. Besides establishing the branches of our federal government and defining its relationship to the states and the people the main emphasis of the Constitution is to restrain this new leviathan. For example, the navy is a permanent fixture, provided for in the constitution, while the army must be funded with new legislation every two years. The founders, in effect, placed a sunset clause on something as essential as an army to protect the people from abuse by their own leaders.

The powers of the Congress seem expansive and over the last few generations the federal government has slowly constricted its tentacles upon every area of American life. However, the only power they have is the powers we delegate to them. John Locke in his Second Treatise on Government (135) says:

“First [the legislature] is not, nor can possibly be, absolutely arbitrary over the lives and fortunes of the people. For it being but joint power of ever member of the society given up to that person or assembly which is legislator . . .”

The power held by Congress is limited to the power we give them. Actions going beyond this endowment illegally violate our rights. These limits are laid out in the Constitution. Locke goes on in that same section to tell us that the powers we give are not only limited by the terms under which we give them, but are also limited to powers that we ourselves possess in a state of nature. Since I have no right to seize my neighbor’s property without just recompense, I have no right to empower the legislature to do this.

Thankfully, the state governments are beginning to see the light and to make legislative demands that the federal government withdraw to its intended legal limits, but this does not absolve the people. We must defend our own Constitution. It is our document, our government and our sovereignty that is being wielded unjustly. We must stop them. But how? First, be educated. Learn the Constitution, get a copy of it and read it. Many organizations, like the Heritage Foundation will give you a free copy. Study history and government, both ours and others. Speak with your kids to teach them why we as Americans do not trust our government and instill this proper distrust in them. Examine your children’s history books and correct the lies they are fed. In this way you will raise kids unfit for slavery. Recognize abuse for what it is and speak out. Beyond this hold your representative responsible and finally whenever the polls are open vote. Your vote should not be just for party but for the constitution, demanding that candidates, even your party’s own, answer constitutional questions intelligently and effectively before you support them.

Of course these state actions will be meaningless without further legislation to make violation of states’ rights costly for Washington.

So what should be next on the horizon in this battle to curb abuse of the states. Next the 17th amendment should be repealed to reinstate representation of state governments in the Congress. The current arrangement pits the state legislature against the people. After this should be the repeal of the 16th amendment to take away the federal governments ability to interject itself so deeply into the lives of her people through tax on incomes.

“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.”

Notice that it says unless a power has been expressly delegated to Congress or expressly prohibited to the States (printing money, making treaties, et al.) then the power belongs to the States or the people. This means it is not a federal matter and no appeal to the Commerce Clause, or the Necessary and Proper Clause can change that. We must get back to the understanding that the primary concern of the Constitution, after the formation of the federal government was limitation of that government to serve the needs of the people and the states.

There are currently two states considering passage of a bill to resuscitate the Tenth Amendment. Summaries of the two bills are available here:

• Arizona bill HCR 2024
• New Hampshire bill HCR 6

The federal government for too long has held sway over the states with unfunded mandates, with nonsensical laws and regulations showing little understanding or concern for local needs. This affirmation of the principles upon which this country was founded must be carried to all fifty states.

Article I: Section 3 of the Constitution said: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.”

The House of Representative would represent the people, while the Senate would represent the interests of the states—the other organ of popular sovereignty. The more populous states, able to swing the House would not be able to run over the others. The House would be reelected every two years giving the people a chance to make quick changes, but the Senate would be in place for six years, representing the states and putting the breaks on an expansive federal government.

In today’s Congress, LA County and New York City have more representation in the House than the combined states of Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Maine, Montana, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming and both Dakotas. The founders knew this would be a problem because the larger states could dictate to the smaller and since the 17th Amendment this is exactly what has happened. States with larger populations have been able to pass laws based on the interests of their own people, while the smaller states have had no way to fight these efforts—in effect being without representation.

The only hope for the continued freedom of the people of this country is to reign in the federal government. It was not meant to rule the states but to represent them and the people. The preamble to the Constitution tells us the purpose of the federal government:

• To form a more perfect Union
• To establish justice
• To insure domestic tranquility
• To provide for the common defense
• To promote the general welfare
• To secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity

Under the articles of Confederation the United States was the laughing stock of nations. Each state looked after its own interests and saw the other states as competitors on the world stage. By forming this new Union the states would be able to work together as a body seeking the good of all. The states were not to be dissolved into the federal government, but were to be defended, promoted, equalized and empowered through it. The people would speak directly to the state legislatures and to the House of Representatives. The decisions of the House would be counter-balanced by the representatives of the states protecting the interests of smaller populations. This is exactly what the founders intended when they framed our Constitution.

Do you want to do away with unfunded mandates and ear-marks, repealing the 17th Amendment is a great step forward.

For more information check out: Repeal 17