TBO.com - Tampa Bay Online
About This Blog:
The Jax Files is an interactive, quick-hitting blog devoted to any and all things Pasco, whether whole-heartedly, tangentially or merely psychologically.
Tom Jackson:
Tom Jackson is in a 12-step program for recovering sports writers; as part of his rehabilitation, he writes a column centered on the people, politics, passions and peculiarities of Pasco County. Email
Pasco County Links:
Most Recent Entries
- Stripped Fasano unbowed by ‘schoolyard bully’
- Limbaugh pokes Weatherford; “desperate,” says Will
- We’d think this was just nutty ...
- Obama rejects Keystone pipeline
- Fasano’s end game: No more NFL in Florida
- The silence of the NLRB
- Former Air Force Colonel Wants to Challenge Castor
- Another lefty talking point bites the dust
- On Rubio, Washington Post earns three Pinnochios
- Steve Jobs’ David Mamet moment (whiffed)
- Dopiness of Occupy Wall Street revealed, er, confirmed
- Curious case of the curious little blue heron
- Democrats: Nugent won’t spend other people’s money (waa!)
- Obama’s unintended argument for an ‘ownership society’
- Who’s next to demand nuptial rights?
More
- Highlands: Ms. Cuisine
- Town 'N Country
- Brandon
- Highlands County
- In The Loop
- Northeast Now
- Northwest
- Pasco Personalities With Geoff Fox
- Plant City
- Carrollwood
- South Shore
- Temple Terrace
- The Jax Files - With Tom Jackson in Pasco
- The Sun
- South Tampa
Monthly Archives
|
| Pasco County News | Breaking News |
In Praise Of The Forgotten 10th Amendment
Posted Feb 24, 2009 by Tom Jackson
Updated Feb 24, 2009 at 11:49 PM
Alert reader John Curley turns our attention to what may or may not be a legitimate phenomenon, let alone a bona fide movement, but it does provide the Jax Files an opportunity to discuss one of our favorite members of the Bill of Rights: good old No. 10.
The 10th Amendment – 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 – is simultaneously perfectly straightforward and utterly disregarded by the modern federal government. The latter is unfortunate, given that the underappreciated No. 10 was designed to profoundly constrain federal mischief-making, evidence of which lately abounds.
No. 10 operated largely as the framers intended (with the possible exception of that 1860s brawl over rights of secession), limiting the federal government’s reach precisely to the powers enumerated in the Constitution. Give the Founders credit for taking seriously not only the rights declared as unalienable in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence, but also from Whom those rights descended.
Then came the Great Depression, FDR’s New Deal legislation and, over time, the eroding of a transitional Supreme Court over the proper interpretation of the Commerce Clause, which provided Congress with the ability to and responsibility of regulating trade among the states.
The most obvious enduring result is the explosive growth in Washington’s influence and ability to meddle (and inability to resist meddling) with states in ways that – had the legislatures of the 1780s imagined it possible – could have, almost certainly would have, prevented the Constitution’s ratification.
Curley, a staunch originalist himself, reports with barely contained glee a strain of 1780s sensibilities finding new life in state legislatures across the country. Impressively, of the 25 states expected to contemplate reasserting constitutinal sovereignty (Florida’s absence glares), a substantial number of them are not traditional “red” states, including Washington, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
In an appearance Monday on Fox News’ “Fox and Friends,” Dan Itse, a state representative from the deep purple state of New Hampshire, explained the insurgency thusly: “[T]his is not about secession. It’s about drawing the line in the sand and saying we’ve tolerated usurpations for so long, but we’re not going to tolerate you violating the Constitution anymore. We’re going to hold you accountable. It’s about shifting the burden of responsibility.”
Let’s be clear: No state legislature has passed a state sovereignty measure. And in several states where one has been introduced, its survival is, at best, suspect. Nonetheless, that an idea as old as the founding of the nation – an idea, indeed, that was fundamental to the founding of the nation – has raised its glorious head at this particularly troubling moment in U.S. history may mean that we at last will have a desperately overdue debate about precisely how much authority Washington should wield.
Here’s an idea: As part of that larger argument, let’s find out whether free people in free states still believe that a government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away.
Post a comment
Members:(Requires free registration.)
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement
TBO.com - Tampa Bay Online ©2010 Media General Communications Holdings, LLC. A Media General company. Member Agreement | Privacy Statement | Work With Us
Reader Comments
Por (Henry A. Miranda, Jr.) on February 26, 2009 (Suggest removal)
I was glad to learn that a private citizen, (one John Curley), took the trouble to point out a most important usurpation of States’ Rights by the federal government that has been winked at for far too long. I am also glad that a public media organ noticed his action, and has amplified this lone citizen’s deep concern about the matter.
Suggest removal