• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Null and Void in MT

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
HELENA - Republican U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg didn't say the word "nullification" last week when he talked to the Montana Legislature about federal overreach - but he certainly spoke the same language as the proponents of nullification.Rehberg, who's challenging Democratic U.S. Sen. Jon Tester next year, told lawmakers there are "two basic visions" of the federal government in America, and the one he follows is more power to the states to assert their rights.

"It's the idea that the states created the federal government, not the other way around," he said. "It's the idea that Washington has important responsibilities, but limited powers."Proponents of nullification believe states can determine which acts of Congress exceed its constitutional authority, and then declare those acts "null and void" and refuse to follow or enforce them.
Several Republican lawmakers have introduced bills at the 2011 Legislature to nullify federal laws in Montana, such as the Endangered Species Act and federal health reform.They point to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution as their authority, which says powers not delegated to the federal government are "reserved to the states respectively, or the people."Rehberg made a clear reference to this line of thought in his Monday speech, quoting James Madison, the fourth president, as writing "the powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite."He then quoted the writing of Thomas Jefferson.

"The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government."

If freedom haters aren't already crapping in their depends, this might just set them off!

HELENA - Montana may be part of this United States, but in the halls of the state Legislature, some Republicans are saying Montana can and should ignore federal laws it doesn't like - by declaring them "null and void."

From health care reform to food safety laws to the Endangered Species Act, GOP lawmakers this session are targeting laws for "nullification," proposing bills that put Montana on record as declaring these laws unconstitutional and not enforceable here.Rep. Derek Skees, R-Whitefish, has even proposed setting up a permanent legislative commission that could review any federal law for possible nullification by the Legislature.

Skees told a House panel last week that Montana voters put Republicans in power this session because they want to stop an out-of-control federal government.

"This is an attempt to help answer that mandate,"
he said of his House Bill 382. "Our job is to make sure the citizens of Montana are not trampled on. This gives us the right to say, ‘Wait a minute - that's not good for Montana.' "

The push for nullification is part of a national movement, taken up mostly by conservatives, declaring that states have the power to decide whether Congress has exceeded its authority as spelled out in the U.S. Constitution.

"There are things that the federal government gets to do, as defined in the Constitution," says Bryce Shonka, deputy director of the 10th Amendment Center, a Los Angeles-based group promoting nullification. "But the list of responsibilities that the government currently oversees is far beyond what the founding fathers intended."
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
I should have added this:


More than a half-dozen bills are before the Legislature to "nullify" or defy federal law, in some fashion. Here is a sampling of those bills, and their status:

Senate Bill 161: Declares the federal health reform laws unconstitutional and says Montana will not comply. Sponsored by Sen. Verdell Jackson, R-Kalispell. Awaits action in the Senate Public Health Committee.

House Bill 284: Forbids state employees from doing anything to implement the federal health reform acts. Sponsored by Rep. Tom Burnett, R-Bozeman. Awaits action in the House Human Services Committee.

HB321: Declares the federal Endangered Species Act unconstitutional and invalid in Montana. Sponsored by Rep. Krayton Kerns, R-Laurel. Awaits action in the House Judiciary Committee.

HB381: Makes it a crime to enforce federal firearms laws on firearms manufactured in the state. Sponsored by Kerns. Scheduled for hearing Wednesday in the House Judiciary Committee.

HB382: Creates a legislative commission that reviews all federal laws for possibly nullification. If the commission decides a law should be nullified, the full Legislature will then vote whether to nullify it and declare that Montanans don't have to comply. Sponsored by Rep. Derek Skees, R-Whitefish. Awaits action in the House Judiciary Committee.

HB443: Declares any future federal food safety laws to be void in Montana, for any food grown, processed or sold within the state. Sponsored by Burnett. Scheduled for hearing Tuesday in the House Agriculture Committee.

HB448: Creates an interstate "firearm freedom compact" of states that have declared invalid the enforcement of federal firearms law for firearms manufactured in-state. Sponsored by Kerns. Scheduled for hearing Thursday in House Judiciary Committee.

Maybe this is partly why Chuck Baldwin labeled Montana the "tip of the spear" for Freedoms movement and then moved here.
Chuck, among other things,was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitutional party.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
oh where to post this one..........

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — Republicans enthused by Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer's recent tough talk on wolves are getting closer to using an ancient "nullification" doctrine to disregard the federal law protecting endangered and threatened species — a plan the governor quickly dismissed as "off base."
Excited tea party politics in the Legislature have spawned increasing belief in Thomas Jefferson's late 18th-century "nullification" idea that aims to give states the ultimate say in constitutional matters and let them ban certain federal laws in their borders. Conservatives stoking anti-federal government sentiment are not dissuaded by the legal scholars who say the notion runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution that considers federal law "the supreme law of the land."

Republicans running the Montana House used their big majority Saturday to endorse nullification of the federal Endangered Species Act in Montana with a 61-39 vote — even though dispatching with the act would cost Montana roughly $1 billion in federal funds that comes with strings attached.

Schweitzer, a Democrat, quickly warned the lawmakers he doesn't like their idea — even though just days earlier he encouraged ranchers in northern Montana to shoot wolves that harass their livestock and defiantly said state agents may kill packs of endangered wolves.

"Essentially the governor nullified the Endangered Species Act two days ago," said Republican Rep. Krayton Kerns of Laurel. "That is a very aggressive move. When I look at the articles in the paper I have to think he is on board with what we are trying to do."
Schweitzer quickly offered clarification after the vote that his bravado in no way meant he would work outside the Endangered Species Act. The governor said he believes federal law gives the flexibility for ranchers to shoot the northern Montana wolves, and said he has the authority to tell state wildlife agents to ignore such wolf shootings. And Schweitzer is now stressing that he will wait for federal permission before state agents take out entire packs of wolves.
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
I do believe that States should be more in control of themselves. I have an issue with picking and choosing which laws will be allowed and which won't- on a basis of benefit. If the Fed is overstepping its bounds, then the States have a duty to not allow its implementation.

Nullification is part of the issue. The second part of the issue is now controlling State citizens from being unfairly taxed by the Federal Government to support programs they deem unconstitutional that is implemented in other States.

If it is determined by the State that 20% of all federal dollars are spent on items that are unconstitutional, how do you hold 20% of all federal taxes from your citizens?
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Hereford76 said:
sounds like BS did a little tip toeing backwards... i'd say don't let him, they need to bully him up against the ropes and ko

BS had been running around for 4 years telling everyone how he
"told the federal government to go to hell" over the real ID act.
he has been bragging about nullifting it.
actually it was the legislature that voted it down (twice) but BS has been trying to take all the credit for it.

as you sow , so you shall reap! let the chickens come home to roost!
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
this is getting interesting- makin national news now
(although very biased)


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110224/ap_on_re_us/us_tea_party_world#mwpphu-container


the comment section is very interesting too!
 

Tam

Well-known member
It will definitely be interesting to see if this will stand up in Court if Montana is challenged by the Feds. :wink:
 
Top