Tom Woods: Interview With A Zombie

This is hilarious!



I've stated before that I'm not particularly fond of nullification. I'd much prefer that states be able to nullify unconstitutional federal laws through the Senate. However, until that's possible, we should do everything we can to fight off the federal leviathan.

What Do We Do Now?

I don't know who the speaker is, but this was in Palm Beach, California:



The pursuit of nullification is a dangerous strategy. A repeal of the 17th Amendment would allow for a more controlled, incremental reduction in federal power. Nullification risks encouraging a much faster change, and therefore it is more radical and unstable. But at this point in time, it's worth reminding those who favor centralized power that there are limits to what they can do.

Hat tip: Tenth Amendment Center

This Is What Nullification Looks Like

On Thursday, [Virginia] became the first state to enact legislation that prohibits the federal government from forcing its citizens to purchase government-approved health insurance. The measure was sponsored by two Northern Virginians - State Senator Jill Vogel, R-Warrenton, and Del. Bob Marshall, R-Manassas - who also co-signed a Feb. 24 letter to President Obama protesting state legislators’ exclusion from his recent health care summit. ...

Legislators in more than 30 other states are also considering similar bills based on the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Freedom of Choice in Health Care model.

The Tenth Amendment Center has a map of pending health care "nullification" bills that challenge the federal government’s jurisdiction based on its reading of the Constitution.

The REAL ID Act wasn't nullified, because states simply did not implement it (REAL ID was not mandatory). Nullification is an active rejection of federal authority. Virginia is the second state (after Montana) in recent memory to engage in nullification.

This is the week when we shall know whether the federal health care legislation will be signed or not. It all comes down to whether or not Speaker Pelosi can come up with enough votes.

The Spirit of Jefferson Lives in Virginia

The ability of states to judge the Constitutionality of an act of Congress originally lay in the authority of state legislatures to appoint Senators who would restrain the House from passing unconstitutional legislation. (Though nullification was discussed even before the Constitution became law, once the Senate was properly in place, Senators worked to preserve decentralization while still fighting for good ideas, such as abolition, etc., with nullification being just a threat. Yes, it's an oversimplification.) Repealing the 17th Amendment would make the threat of nullification unnecessary because states would nullify unconstitutional acts before they ever became law. Repealing the 17th Amendment now would also create a Senate which would, over time, work to gradually reduce unconstitutional infringements on our liberty. This would be so because Senators who did not fight for their states would not be reappointed by the state legislature. As it is, ridiculous personalities and party theatrics are how Senators get elected and re-elected now. And their single-minded purpose is to preserve power for their party and perpetuate the party system.

Hat tip: Tenth Amendment Center