House bypasses governor’s veto to claim Oklahoma’s sovereignty

[SemiCharmedQuark]

House bypasses governor’s veto to claim Oklahoma’s sovereignty
Comments Comment on this article352
Buzz up!
BY MICHAEL MCNUTT
Published: May 5, 2009

Although Gov. Brad Henry vetoed similar legislation 10 days earlier, House members Monday again approved a resolution claiming Oklahoma’s sovereignty.

Gov. Brad Henry speaks to members of the Oklahoma Press Association at their convention held at the Doubletree Hotel Downtown in Tulsa. SHERRY BROWN/Tulsa World Friday, Feb. 6, 2009

Advertisement

Unlike House Joint Resolution 1003, House Concurrent Resolution 1028 does not need the governor’s approval.

The House passed the measure 73-22. It now goes to the Senate.

"We’re going to get it done one way or the other,” said the resolutions’ author, Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City.

"I think our governor is out of step.”

But don't get the mistaken notion that this sovereignty means they don't want federal funds...

Key said HCR 1028, which, if passed, would be sent to Democratic President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, would not jeopardize federal funds but would tell Congress to "get back into their proper constitutional role.” The resolution states the federal government should "cease and desist” mandates that are beyond the scope of its powers.

Key said many federal laws violate the 10th Amendment, which says powers not delegated to the U.S. government "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution lists about 20 duties required of the U.S. government, he said."

http://www.newsok.com/house-bypasses-governors-veto-to-claim-oklahomas-sovereignty/article/3366762

[vaberella]

1. Goodbye Oklahoma...Washington DC has taken your place. Texas...remember Guam. n/t

[Pirate Smile]

7. LOL

Nice. :D

[usregimechange]

14. Don't forget to swap Alaska with the new Hawaiian island forming in the Pacific ocean

[vaberella]

16. Even better. We won't have to change the stars on the flag. If Pluto could be demoted so can states.

n/t

[tularetom]

2. My parents are buried there

Shit like this makes me want to dig them up and rebury them someplace where the general level of intelligence is higher.

[Cha]

5. Do not blame you.

Mine is in Colorado.

[LiberalFighter]

19. Have them cremated and then just spread their ashes in the wind.

That way it will be mixed in the soil of all the states eventually.

[Cha]

3. Does Oklahoma have any military

bases? They won't be needing them if they're not a part of the United STates of America.

Will we go back to 49 states like before Hawai'i joined?

And, why should they get Fed Funds?

[MgtPA]

15. Fort Sill?

[BlooInBloo]

4. I don't think anybody could have predicted that slave states would do independence declarations...

after the election of a black man as President. How shocking.

[Cha]

6. They need to get over

their fucking selves.

[BlooInBloo]

8. But that would be to admit that they and their ancestors were wrong....

And that's completely un-American.

[droidamus2]

9. Not only don't the Republicans believe in science..

They don't seem to believe in history either. I can't claim to be a Constitutional scholar but I do know that one of the reasons the writers of the Constitution didn't try to list out all the federal responsibilities was they felt that would be an exercise in futility as they would without a doubt leave something out. So again the Republicans want to take something that was written to be flexible and open to interpretation by the judicial branch and make it an absolute. Of course it always seems that the only time the Republicans are for 'states rights' is when they apply to something they want.

[BlooInBloo]

10. Well, other than the 10th Amendment, which says the exact opposite...

yah.

"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."

[Political Heretic]

13. Yes the poster is confusing opinion about the bill of rights debate with the powers debate

The debate was over the bill of rights.... some people felt that if you listed some rights, then one day some fool would claim that *only* those rights were protected which was not desired. (That's a paraphrase, but the "some fool" part is a quote.

[droidamus2]

18. Thanks for clearing that up

Okay like I said I am no constitutional scholar. It still remains that the 10th amendment doesn't address how the articles of the constitution express powers of the federal government. I just did some reading and apparently as an example the commerce clause is one that it used fairly extensively by the courts in granting the federal government power over and within states. As was pointed out the 10th amendment points out a truism but in no way enumerates or modifies what the constitution itself says. As in many aspects of the Constitution you have divided opinion in saying that only those powers 'expressly' granted are allowed (even though apparently the word 'expressly' was intentionally not used) and those like me that say the powers granted are much more open to judicial interpretation. Since the courts are the final arbiters of what is meant by the articles of the Constitution they control to a great extent what the federal powers are and what powers are reserved to the states and it is not the states right or job to define their own rights (barring constitutional amendments that is).

[tsuki]

11. Where were they during the Bush years? eoq

[Political Heretic]

12. I pretty much hate states.

Yeah, I said it.

Either we should be 50 separate countries with diplomatic relations or we should be one big country, but not both.

[DrToast]

17. Let them secede. And then...

Build a wall around it and deny them access to our airspace. See ya later! :hi: