MyFox
 

Northton

by northton from the Land of Free Spe

Last Post 13 days, 14 hours Ago


Hello fellow Bloggers!

This is the tenth of eleven installments of:

"How to Be A Real American"

That's right, we are discussing Our Bill of Rights (YOUR RIGHTS!).

So far we've discussed the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, the right to eat Krispy Kreme donuts, and much more. This time we will be discussing amendment ten of the Constitution of the United States of America.

 

Amendment X 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.

 

The Tenth Amendment makes explicit the idea that the federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution, however, this amendment has been bypassed, and states' rights may have been violated.

 

Per Wikipedia: The Commerce Clause has been cited in many cases that have allowed the federal government to limit what were previously considered rights "reserved to the States respectively or to the people. In Wickard v. Filburn (1942), the Court ruled that federal regulations of wheat production could constitutionally be applied to wheat grown for "home consumption" on a farm--that is, wheat grown to be fed to farm animals or otherwise consumed on the farm. The rationale was that a farmer's growing "his own wheat" can have a substantial cumulative effect on interstate commerce, because if all farmers were to exceed their production quotas, a significant amount of wheat would either not be sold on the market or would be bought from other producers. Hence, in the aggregate, if farmers were allowed to consume their own wheat, it would affect the interstate market in wheat."

 

So basically the Federal Government is now in charge of anything that can be bought of sold or used because its use will affect interstate commerce.

 

"Medical marijuana was explicitly made legal under California state law by Proposition 215; however, marijuana is prohibited at the federal level by the Controlled Substances Act. Even though the woman grew the marijuana strictly for her own consumption and never sold any, the Supreme Court stated that growing one's own marijuana affects the interstate market of marijuana, citing the Wickard v. Filburn decision. It therefore ruled that this practice may be regulated by the federal government under the penumbra of the Commerce Clause."

 

Who but a lawyer would say that with a straight face?

Who else would say that the federal government should overrule state law because, by not selling it, a woman's home garden produce is affecting national weed demand, and therefore, national commerce! Next thing you know, we won't be able to sing karaoke because it affects national record sales! (In my case it could cause a considerable drop in sales.)

Okay, okay, I'm back in my chair. As we have seen, this "Commerce Clause" can be used to give the federal government power over anything that can, or even can't, be sold no matter what the individual state laws say.

 

What do you think?

Is the federal government abusing states' and individuals' Tenth Amendment rights?

Is the use of a commerce clause a valid action or just a slick way for the federal government to overrule state power?

How will this slippery use of federal law affect all of our other rights "guaranteed" to us in the Bill of Rights?

 

34 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 34
Page 1 of 2
1
Last
Meb452m read my blog
Apr 16, 2008 | 6:45 PM

From the Magna Carta to the Constitution nothing stated that a or any number of states couldn't leave the loose " CONFEDERATION" of the THIRTEEN ORIGINAL COLONIES ! The right to remain or leave was the intent, I believe, and the sole reason for the participation in writting " OUR " Constitution, as there was much heated arguement and dissent durring it's writting. Following that line , Lincoln's actions in persueing a " CIVIL WAR ", were Constitutionally illegal. That was the first suspension of states rights. an unstated precident so to speak. The term " Republic " might also be part of the problem. When we the people elect representatives to that " Republic", there is litle to nothing to guarantee that those representatives actually represent we the people.Because once you have elected a representative in a " Republic " you are authorizing him or her to act in the best intrests of that " Republic ", and little to any of your voice or choice is heard or considered. Suppossedly our rights are protected by a system of checks and balances of a three branch goverment. Do you believe that to be fact ? We'll use the last Immigration Reform Bill, as an example. George Bush with Mel Martinez's support, brought a bill before both legislative branches, against taxpayer will. It was shot down only due to a large volume of complaint by the American taxpayers that it would impoverish. That bill was then resurected again, AGAINST taxpayer will, and brought to a vote again. Once again the TAXPAYERS, that it would impoverish, reacted overwhelmingly against it and solely due to the large v

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 16, 2008 | 6:52 PM

continued : volume of negative response, was finally shot down. I can understand telling a small child " NO " three times, however I don't believe that to be a liberty " OUR " adult representatives should have. But then again we live in a "Republic ". I've pledged allegiance and so have our representatives. I know where my allegience is. I do wonder where "OUR " representative's allegiance lay ?

Good post Norty ! Hope you get a lot of comments !

northton read my blog view my photos
Apr 17, 2008 | 4:59 AM

And I hope they are all as informative and interesting as yours.

"No, Lil' Bush! No!" LOL

bluehorseblues read my blog view my photos
Apr 17, 2008 | 8:46 AM

Ahhh the representatives.....I have often wondered, do I really have to pay my taxes, abide state or federal laws, etc. if I did not choose the representative who is in direct relationship with the tax, law, etc.? That would be fair if you ask me...If I didn't personally elect the SOB I shouldn't have to abide to any of their extra BS. Yeah in a perfect world!

I suppose the original sentiment to this amendment was probably good, but it could be used so negatively now that it is written in stone. Yes it is being used to abuse state and individual rights...California is a good example with the medical marijuana cases going on. Next it will be vegetable gardens and our livestock....no one is really free in this country are they?

Gammies61 read my blog view my photos
Apr 17, 2008 | 11:30 AM

The Commerce Clause. Sounds like a sneaky way to get your stuff.

Abunai read my blog view my photos
Apr 17, 2008 | 3:07 PM

Well bluehorseblues.. thats why we are actually a REPUBLIC!

Lets add to this debate the issue of Abortion then. Roe vs. Wade snatched this issue away from the individual States as well. Yet I don't hear anyone on the left adding this to the debate but rather picking and choosing things like commerce.

If the issue truely is State's rights, then it should incorperate ALL examples of the Federal Govt. actions should it not?

So are we taking issue with commerce or States rights here...

Gammies61 read my blog view my photos
Apr 17, 2008 | 5:56 PM

Apparently Abunai, states don't have rights, as long as the country can fall back on The Commerce Clause. Is there any state right now, who won't perform abortions? Are you confusing me, with nonsense about abortion, to tell me, I can't grow wheat? Come on please talk to me as if I were a child, and tell me why I can't grow wheat!

Is this like saying, you can't have any meat, if you don't eat your pudding?

Sorry, just busting your.....LOL

DaytonaFrank read my blog view my photos
Apr 17, 2008 | 6:20 PM

So if I grow tomatos for personal consumption, that would affect commerce?
What if I grew too many to use myself, and gave some to my neighbors? Would I be arrested?
According to the Commerce Clause I could be!

As for growing weed, I would think it would have to be legal, and traded with currency for that law to apply.
Like with alcohol. You can buy it legally, but you cannot set up a still.

Seems like they use the laws for thier own benefit, when need be.

Can a US citizen win against the government?

northton read my blog view my photos
Apr 18, 2008 | 7:42 AM

Abunai it is about the tenth amendment. I was just giving an example of an abuse. And it's obvious abuse. It's like saying, "We know it's wrong but the end justifies the means."

I appreciate you input. You seem pretty politically inclined. Do you know of any more abuses of states rights?

Yes, Frank. By growing your own tomatos, your garden is reducing your, and therefore national, tomato demand and is therefore subject to federal regulation.

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 18, 2008 | 3:16 PM

Norty what about the gals that grow really big mellons ? Are their really big mellons subject to Federal regulation ? Could this hinder their mellon production ? Our could this hamper my ability to view and squeeze really big mellons ? LOL !!! I'm sorry I couldn't help myself. Will making another comment erase any possible demeritts ?

northton read my blog view my photos
Apr 19, 2008 | 5:36 AM

Growing bigger mellons affects the demand and interstate commerce of mellons.

Growing bigger mellons here also affects other industries like tourism, cause everyone will want to come and see our big mellons.

"If you think our oranges look juicy, you should see our melons."

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 19, 2008 | 3:57 PM

Thanks Norty, anything that could infringe on mellon rights should be removed from the books. Getting back to the topic, I believe most language used in bills or law today is designed to give the illusion of alieving or addressing an issue,. They are designed to appease public demand, without any real thought of inforcing them. Most people seem to think that the lawyer's work ( words on paper ) has value and it does to the lawyer, they are paid it. Toilet paper has more value then most written legislation, as toilet will always take care of the crap at hand, legislation usually leaves you standing there with a handfull of more!

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 19, 2008 | 4:08 PM

Nice sandbox you've got here Norty. Mine's pretty nice too, you know you're welcome there ! LOL !!! aaaaaah dee blog ! Mebeen Geeten Bloggen Rollen ?

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 19, 2008 | 5:18 PM

Are you looking for a kick-ball Norty ?

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 19, 2008 | 5:44 PM

Or would you be looking for a dodge-ball ? Mebeen Geeten Bloggen Rollen !

northton read my blog view my photos
Apr 20, 2008 | 7:36 AM

Keine, habe ich viel der Kugeln bereits.
Der bloggen est gruben.

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 20, 2008 | 9:22 AM

You lost me on that one Norty, I'll need a translation. lol If you're intrested about the meeting, I'll be posting more information this comming week. I've got to find when a kiosk is available. It should be a great day of fun. I didn't think I needed to be round and orange to get along. LOL !!!! YEAH, I know I've got to do something about an avitar. I'm still giving it some thought. This was a good post, I believe most people believe that reguardless of what the laws say in the way of your rights or protections, your rights will be ignorred or taken away anyways. Things will never change as long as there is division between the people. For wheter you're left, middle or right, all of the politicians treat us the same. We the people are not a doormat, I believe that one thing we can all agree on !

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 20, 2008 | 12:04 PM

The blog is garbage ? Awww come on now Norty ! You can do better than that !

northton read my blog view my photos
Apr 20, 2008 | 1:45 PM

nein! nein! GRUBEN!! Like gettinze grube!

Meb452m read my blog
Apr 20, 2008 | 2:07 PM

Whaaaaaaaaat? Actung Minen ! The amount of German words could be counted on fingers and toes. I'm struggling here Norty ! LOL!!! gettinze grube- getting the groove ? getting the grub ?

Page 1 of 2
1
Last


Write your comment below:




northton

I like sharing ideas and ideals in an open forum. I may not like what you have to say but you can still say it here. I try to be fair. I'll often admit that the positions I support have flaws. I detest bloggers who always base their opinions on their political party's rhetoric and never have an original thought. I am neither a Republican or a Democrat. I vote for whoever I think will do the best job of running things. I may be wrong but at least I think with my own brain. I think Rush Limbaugh is the biggest and most dishonest jerk that ever lived. John "New Orleans Deserved It" Hagee is somewhere right alongside him. If you like Limbaugh or Hagee then you're ignorant and you suck. Whatever you think, join the blog! Come and debate! Let the politicians know what the public really thinks on an open forum like mine where free speech cannot be denied!

Member Since: 1/23/2007