HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Mississippi GOPers Pushin...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:45 AM

Mississippi GOPers Pushing Bill To ‘Assert The Sovereignty Of The State’

Source: Talking Points Memo

The bill, known as the Mississippi Balance of Powers Act, was authored by state Rep. Gary Chism (R), chairman of the House Insurance Committee, and Rep. Jeff Smith (R), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. Earlier this week, the bill was referred to the House Constitution Committee.

“The provisions of this act shall serve as a notice and demand to the federal government to cease and desist any and all activities outside the scope of its designated constitutionally enumerated powers, and that attempt to diminish the balance of powers as established,” the bill reads.

The neutralization committee called for in the bill would enforce “a constitutional balance of powers,” and would be made up of the lieutenant governor, six members of the state Senate appointed by the lieutenant governor, the speaker of the state House of Representatives or his designee and six members of the House of Representatives appointed by the speaker. The committee will be allowed to review “any and all existing federal statutes, mandates and executive orders for the purpose of determining their constitutionality.” Any measure that is found to be “beyond the scope and power assigned to the federal government under Article 1 of the United States Constitution or in direct violation of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890” may be recommended for neutralization by the simple majority vote of each house of the Mississippi State Legislature.

“If the Mississippi State Legislature votes by simple majority to neutralize any federal statute, mandate or executive order on the grounds of its lack of proper constitutionality, then the state and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order,” the bill reads.

Read more: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/mississippi_sovereignty_bill.php?ref=fpa



http://www.clarionledger.com/assets/pdf/D0199718124.PDF

31 replies, 3545 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 31 replies Author Time Post
Reply Mississippi GOPers Pushing Bill To ‘Assert The Sovereignty Of The State’ (Original post)
kpete Jan 2013 OP
BainsBane Jan 2013 #1
KansDem Jan 2013 #8
Renew Deal Jan 2013 #2
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #3
lastlib Jan 2013 #4
KansDem Jan 2013 #5
lobodons Jan 2013 #6
Bonhomme Richard Jan 2013 #7
Botany Jan 2013 #12
Odin2005 Jan 2013 #23
geomon666 Jan 2013 #9
thetonka Jan 2013 #10
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #11
thetonka Jan 2013 #16
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #19
thetonka Jan 2013 #20
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #24
thetonka Jan 2013 #25
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #26
thetonka Jan 2013 #27
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #29
thetonka Jan 2013 #30
question everything Jan 2013 #13
struggle4progress Jan 2013 #14
mahatmakanejeeves Jan 2013 #15
LeftinOH Jan 2013 #17
Plucketeer Jan 2013 #18
JoePhilly Jan 2013 #21
Odin2005 Jan 2013 #22
winter is coming Jan 2013 #28
yellowcanine Jan 2013 #31

Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:49 AM

1. great, then we can stop subsidizing them too

They take twice as much in federal subsidies as they pay in taxes. They are the biggest of the red state welfare queens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:49 AM

2. Another meaningless gesture

Just wasting peoples time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:49 AM

3. Guess the feds should pull out every dime they spend in Mississippi and let them

fend for themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:49 AM

4. Just kick 'em the f**k out of the union, if they don't want to live under our laws....

But we keep all the money they've been getting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:51 AM

5. Where were these "10th Amendmenters" during Bush v. Gore?

I wonder...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:52 AM

6. Its called Nullification

Its called nullification, and I'm pretty sure we have been there done that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:55 AM

7. They fought that war long ago.

And lost. Do they really want to try it again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonhomme Richard (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:05 PM

12. Yep! 1861 to 1865

Final Score North 350 South 25

Sometimes I think we would have better off if we had lined up all the
treasonous southern leaders and generals and shot them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:54 PM

23. Not just the generals, all the planter class, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:56 AM

9. Wow

So the local officials are going to decide what's constitutional and what isn't? Yeah, ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:57 AM

10. Stronger States, weaker Fed

It's a good thing. Think about it, there is no way this country is going to come together. Quite the contrary in fact, it is becoming more and more divisive.

If each state could go it's own direction, whether Liberal, Conservative, libertarian, whatever, then people could choose to live under a government they want. This would include less taxes to the Fed so that more money remained in the states. State's like Mississippi would be free to experiment with their conservative ideals, and see how it works out. States like California would be free to let a strong Democrat Governor run the state and see how that works out.

Actually that last part is a joke, California did elect a Democrat Governor, and we are already seeing improvements.

If the idealists on each side are really in support of the ideals why not give them a chance to really let those ideals run? A weaker Fed and Stronger States gives the people that opportunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thetonka (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:03 PM

11. Yeah, why bother with a country to have a military, build roads, regulate trade, etc. Then in

another few years we can look just like Somalia! Or we could go to the county level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:31 PM

16. Why would the fed give those things up?

That's jumping a little too far.

Just because the fed is weaker, does not mean it is gone.

Military, national infrastructure, international trade(even inter state trade) are all things that could be obvious as federal authority. However, things like sales tax, education, building codes, health care, and much more could be turned over to the states. As the policies play out people could choose to live in states that are more aligned to their ideals and views. You would end up with states that aren't just red and blue on the map, but actually red and blue.

In the long run there would be much more opportunity for different policies, regulations, laws to be put to the test. Let's take the taxes argument. California would likely establish a progressive tax structure that leveled higher taxes on the wealthier amongst us. Whereas Texas would not. In 5-10 years it would be pretty obvious which one works.

Right now the different views on policy, regulation, and laws are argued at the federal level. Neither side is going to make any progress in the current environment so there really is no chance that either side will be able to see their goals become reality, and there will be very little real facts to support which side is right.

I just think that it would be nice to give the liberals and conservatives a real world opportunity to put their ideas to the test. I'm sick of hearing the arguments over who is right when there is little chance either side will be able to prove themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thetonka (Reply #16)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:53 PM

19. I've lived in 7 states as an adult and realize the extreme differences those states have. Take just,

welfare, in your 'ideal' the states with great benefits would have millions bankrupting them while the 'conservative' states would simply not provide any security to people. Texas would be a living hell for the poor within weeks.

I've got a better plan. Let's have the feds cut off all funding in states like Mississippi and Texas. No more highway dollars, no more help with Medicaid and Medicare, no military bases or government contracts. Let's see who cries 'uncle'.

You need a moral compass if you can't decide what's right. You've probably spent your entire life under a 'liberal' federal government. Liberal thought is why we have safe guards for people when they lose their jobs or health. Liberal ideas are why you get paid OT and have a 40 hour work week and don't see 10 year olds on the factory floors. Liberal ideas is why there's still a tad of control over Wall Street and your money doesn't just 'disappear' from the bank. In fact, it was liberal ideas that brought this country into existence.

Ayn Rand was dead wrong. Conservative thought is simply, "I got mine, the hell with you."

P.S. Take a look at where the 'conservative' states rank. Last in health care, last in wages, last in education, first in addiction, first in domestic violence, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:39 PM

20. You're making my argument for me

Let the conservatives have their states, and let them fail. Let the liberals have their states and prove their way is best.


Both sides are arguing that their way is the right way and the only way to a successful future. Let's put it all to the test and see who is right. Enough talk, let's make it happen and see who is actually right.


Oh, and for the record, I have never earned OT, rarely work a 40 hour work week, never collected unemployment, never gone without health insurance, and have seen a lot of my wealth disappear because of wall street. I'm not apposed to any of the safety nets this country has, in fact I think they need to be much better. I personally have never used any of them, and mostly by choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thetonka (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:01 PM

24. We don't need to because it's already been demonstrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:13 PM

25. People keep telling me that, yet there is still an argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thetonka (Reply #25)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:18 PM

26. Only from people with no moral compass to guide them to do the right thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #26)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:23 PM

27. So let them go fail on their own.

I see a number of posts in this thread about stopping the flow of federal dollars to Mississippi because of this proposed bill. Why not take it the whole way and let them stand on their own.

Do you really think anyone who is set in their ideals is going to listen to reason? All we are doing is wasting time arguing about who is right and who is wrong. I say everyone should get to prove it. If you are right you succeed, if you are wrong you STFU.


What's wrong with that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thetonka (Reply #27)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:25 PM

29. Because we fought a Civil War about this and I'm not for dissolving the Union.

Don't you believe in the USA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:40 PM

30. I do believe in the USA

You are still assuming that what I am suggesting is to dissolve the country. Quite the contrary. Give each team a little room (I said weaker, not weak fed) to play around with their ideas. We already have some of it now, look at the differences between California and Texas.

Right now the stalemate between the two ideologies is causing FAR more damage than good. There will be no resolution in the future on this path. Both sides are too set in their ways to simply agree, someone needs to try and fail. I'd rather the failure be on a state level than a federal level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:13 PM

13. Fince, secede, already

we can find other uses for all the money pouring into you from the Federal government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:14 PM

14. Cooper v. Aaron: 358 U.S. 1 (1958)

... Article VI of the Constitution makes the Constitution the "supreme Law of the Land." In 1803, Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for a unanimous Court, referring to the Constitution as "the fundamental and paramount law of the nation," declared in the notable case of Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 5 U. S. 177, that "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." This decision declared the basic principle that the federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution, and that principle has ever since been respected by this Court and the Country as a permanent and indispensable feature of our constitutional system ... Every state legislator and executive and judicial officer is solemnly committed by oath taken pursuant to Art. VI, cl. 3 "to support this Constitution" ... No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it ...

Concurring opinion of MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER ... By working together, by sharing in a common effort, men of different minds and tempers, even if they do not reach agreement, acquire understanding and thereby tolerance of their differences ... On the few tragic occasions in the history of the Nation, North and South, when law was forcibly resisted or systematically evaded, it has signaled the breakdown of constitutional processes of government on which ultimately rest the liberties of all ...

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/358/1/case.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:18 PM

15. Also, no one can vote whose grandfather was not registered to vote.

Of course, rules are made to be broken, and it is expected that some Federal funding will continue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascagoula,_Mississippi

Today, Pascagoula is home to the state’s largest employer, Ingalls Shipbuilding, owned by Huntington Ingalls Industries. Other major industries include one of the largest Chevron refineries in the country; Signal International, an oil platform builder; and Mississippi Phosphates.

Naval Station Pascagoula was located on Singing River Island, and was homeport to several Navy warships, as well as a large Coast Guard contingent. However, Naval Station Pascagoula was decommissioned as part of the 2005 BRAC recommendations and ceased operations in 2006.

The city is served by three airports: Mobile Regional Airport, which is located in nearby Mobile, Alabama; the Gulfport-Biloxi International Airport, about 40 miles (64 km) west of Pascagoula; and the Trent Lott International Airport, located within Jackson County.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:36 PM

17. In other words- Mississippi politicians strive to keep Mississippi

at or close to 50th place in every. single. category. of American quality of life. They've done pretty good at it so far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 12:51 PM

18. The road to secession starts here!

Please let there be a "no returns" policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:43 PM

21. Let's help them build a fence around the Free Republic of Mississippi!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 01:53 PM

22. Neo-Confederate revanchist traitors all of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 02:24 PM

28. I feel sorry for the sane people who live in Mississippi. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 04:11 PM

31. This from the state which gets $2 back for every $1 of federal taxes.

This is the John Calhoun nullification doctrine. Maybe they will secede for an encore. We should be so lucky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread