GOP legislators pushing state's rights amendment to state constitution

  • Article by: BOB VON STERNBERG , Star Tribune
  • Updated: April 23, 2010 - 11:24 AM
  • 114
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
mahoneytApr. 23, 1011:29 AM

Could someone please translate?

9
12
rds1449Apr. 23, 1011:31 AM

Unbelievable waste of time and effort.

41
14
notheocrat12Apr. 23, 1011:33 AM

this amendment serves no purpose other than obstruction. If you think the political situation is bad know, how will more red tape and bureaucracy solve it? Is the right's way of "starving the beast" through overfeeding it? Like it or not, our nation of 300 million people cannot effectively be governed without a government. Those who profess the "creep of socialism" would like nothing more than a society of 300 million individuals working individually towards myriad goals and interests, which in the end will only serve the more powerful, which reeks of feudalism. Then where will your "freedom" be?

42
13
eacaffreyApr. 23, 1011:35 AM

Another piece of political garbage proposed for no reason other that to try to gain partisan political advantage. If they were really interested in states rights, they would require a simple majority vote, not a 2/3 vote which is designed for the sole purpose of giving a minority an advantage over the majority. Can you imagine the waste of state taxpayer money if EVERY piece of federal legislation required state approval?? Or is this bill simply to further the political ambitions of one of the bill's three sponsors?

40
12
joethplumberApr. 23, 1011:41 AM

The owebama regime is pushing a cradle to grave utopia only benifiting the elite.

15
50
rick68005Apr. 23, 1011:46 AM

States have the right to invalidate any federal law state officials deem to be unconstitutional not vote on every federal law. Since the GOP leaders want sovereignty for Minnesota's citizens and freedom from the federal government, then Minnesota shouldn't accept a dime from the federal government, right?

35
9
drposterApr. 23, 1011:46 AM

Lets just play devils advocate here. The far right gets into power and mandates the Pledge of Allegiance be recited at the start of the school day and the start of any gov't meeting. Do you want the state to say stick it? How about those of you in favor of sanctuary cities? Federal law says local law enforcement must start working with ICE.

7
20
hayeckmanApr. 23, 1011:48 AM

is a good thing. But, as long as the General Welfare language of the Tax and Spend Clause and the Commerce Clause (inter-state that is) continue to be interpreted to mean the Federal Government has no limitation in imposing mandates and nullifying State Law then this language in the State Constitution is meaningless. The idea is good... but it's application would be over-ruled in a heartbeat by the Federal Courts.

12
12
dahutysApr. 23, 1011:49 AM

That's exactly what I was thinking. It's been almost 150 years and parts of the South still haven't recovered from their attempt to defy the federal government. Also, the whole point of having a federal government is because the whole is more than the sum of its parts. If we head down the road of ignoring the federal government, the United States ceases to exist and the continent just becomes a Balkanized mass of 50+ sovereign states, each one trying to field its own army and print its own currency and keep citizens in rural counties from seceding to form even more "states", sinking into the backwaters as Russia and China take over the world.

25
13
drposterApr. 23, 1011:51 AM

Guess they shouldnt take any federal or state money right?

7
12

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT