Sorry but my question was badly phrased - or not phrased at all - they hardly just get 100 dollars a year ?? They are very cheap TDs.

Interesting question as to whether the Lisbon Treaty has the like of the 10th Amendment .... if ibis is around he might know

I don't understand how or when the 10th Amendment overrules Federal Law though - for now all those states are operating under Federal Law one part of which might be that the Dollar is legal tender in those states and it's an offence to burn the Star Spangled Banner. The 10th Amendment affects the legality of these things does it ? When though - when is it effective or when does it apply ?

Good value for money all right. 100 bucks a year it is.

The 10th amendment is saying that federal law is illegal unless it deals with subject matter written there in

youngdan wrote:

Good value for money all right. 100 bucks a year it is.

The 10th amendment is saying that federal law is illegal unless it deals with subject matter written there in

Is it that Federal Law is null unless it is the same as state law ? And when does it come into effect do you know - it's not effective now in any state is it ? Have those Bills all been defeated ?

Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

http://www.constitution.org/cons/kent1798.htm

Squire wrote:

Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

http://www.constitution.org/cons/kent1798.htm

whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force

So it only applies whenever the Federal Government try to enforce laws that are not State laws or delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution ?

But how else can the Federal Government make laws other than via the Constitution ?

I think that is the point, surely the arguement has to be that the federal government is acting beyond its remit.

Is it to do with Executive Orders - isn't that an avenue by which Federal Law is made that may not derive from the Constitution ?

The Constitution is very well respected isn't it.

Auditor #9 wrote:

youngdan wrote:

Good value for money all right. 100 bucks a year it is.

The 10th amendment is saying that federal law is illegal unless it deals with subject matter written there in

Is it that Federal Law is null unless it is the same as state law ? And when does it come into effect do you know - it's not effective now in any state is it ? Have those Bills all been defeated ?

no,no, no.

None of the bills have been defeated as they are just now being introduced in 25 state legislatives. In Oklahoma it has been voted on by the INTIRE house and passed easily. Next the senate in Oklahoma votes and then the governor decides whether he signs it. All 25 bills are not the same but similiar.

Topics like education, health care, drugs and a long list of other things not listed in the Constutution is no business of the feds and all federal laws about them are void. For example California legalised pot but the feds are still arresting guys for pot. This tells the feds to screw.

So the federal law is null and the state law is whatever the state decides. Some states might outlaw abortion for example and some might legalise it

Jesus it's very radical when you think of it - loads of Federal Law must not derive from the Constitution then but must be made up - the Founding Fathers didn't have ganja mon did they? So who made up that Law on the ganja and on what basis ? The Federal Government can make Laws I'd say as long as they don't violate the constitution - they could decide everyone cannot carry firearms at all but must keep them in their houses whereas at the moment each state has seperate firearm interpretations of the 2nd Amendment.

In Oklahoma if the Senate also passes it (does it look like they will) can the Governor just say "nah - I don't want to sign it, sorry". Hardly.

And if it passes, all the body of Federal Law hitherto written does not apply to Oklahoma ?

The Federal Government can only make laws on issues covered in the constitution.

It remains to be seen Audi. If the governor vetos a bill the legislative body can override his veto and forse it into law on a two thirds majority vote.

You are looking at it backwards. It is not a case of the feds being able to make law unless it violates the constitution. It means that they can only make a law if the constitution lists it as being their responsibility.

This is what the 10th amendment says

youngdan wrote:

It means that they can only make a law if the constitution lists it as being their responsibility.

This is what the 10th amendment says

It can't be put much clearer than that I'd say. It's still a slippery one without examples but your Pot example is good enough as a model.

Someone needs to update Jefferson.

I still don't know if I understand that stuff about the 10th Amendment though - how does a Federal Law get made that bans pot if not someway via the Constitution some way, somehow ? Would asserting the 10th Amendment not mean that states could get into legal wrangling with the Federal Govt. over what is Constitutional and what is not ?


In other news, Hillary Clinton went a-begging to China to get them to continue buying US Treasuries ..



from Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=apSqGtcNsqSY&refer=home

Quote :

Feb. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged China to continue buying U.S. Treasury bonds to help finance President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, saying “we are truly going to rise or fall together.”

“Our economies are so intertwined,” Clinton said in an interview today in Beijing with Shanghai-based Dragon Television. “It would not be in China’s interest” if the U.S. were unable to finance deficit spending to stimulate its stalled economy.

These two are in a strange, semi-symbiotic dance of growth and debt it seems - China wants to grow but it seems to need the US ... could it be that the US dependency allows it to grow at a particular rate which it wouldn't if the US wasn't their biggest consumer ? Surely China would grow anyway by selling to other markets if the US were to fail in their begging mission ?

Quote :

The U.S. is the single largest buyer of the exports that drive growth in China, the world’s third-largest economy. China in turn invests surplus earnings from shipments of goods such as toys, clothing and steel primarily in Treasury securities, making it the world’s largest holder of U.S. government debt at the end of last year with $696.2 billion.

China’s leaders understand that “the United States has to take some very drastic measures with the stimulus package, which means we have to incur debt,” Clinton said. The Chinese are “making a very smart decision by continuing to invest in Treasury bonds,” which she called a “safe investment,” because a speedy U.S. recovery will fuel China’s growth as well.

This looks like the Reserve World Currency again - if the Chinese don't accumulate the dollars then they won't be able to get their share of the world market in oil and whatever else is traded in dollars only.

Quote :

‘No Viable Alternative’

JPMorgan Chase & Co. predicted in a Feb. 6 report that China will keep buying Treasuries “not only for the near-term stability of the global financial system, but also because there is no viable and liquid alternative market in which to invest China’s massive and still growing reserves.”

Why not euros or Sterling ? Maybe it's the case that the best customer at your party (or shipmate on your boat) is the one who can eat the most.

Quote :

“The international financial crisis is having a big impact on the entire world,” Wen told Clinton at their meeting. “I very much appreciate your comment that people should work together like passengers in a boat.”

Or maybe they're genuinely interested in carbon emissions reduction - indeed, could world markets not have reacted child-throwing-toys-out-of-a-pramwise when Obama's Administration came into office - a crowd perhaps serious about carbon emissions and a greener economy?

Quote :

Power Plant Visit

After meeting Yang, Clinton and her special envoy for climate change, Todd Stern, visited the year-old Taiyanggong power plant, a gas-fired low-emission facility powered by General Electric Co. generators and turbines which provides heat for 1 million homes and buildings in Beijing, including the U.S. embassy. The tour was aimed at highlighting opportunities for the world’s two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases to cooperate on clean energy.

Clinton noted that China, with its rapid industrial development, has surpassed the U.S. as the largest source of carbon emissions and said collaboration on green energy would offer a business opportunity.

If you can't grasp the 10th Amendment then we will leave the other 26 for another day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution

read up on them at your leisure

President Obama's State of the Union : "We will recover .."

Gotta give it to Obama. This blind optimism malarky really sells. One can only ponder the consequences if he were to be found running around waving his hands in the air screaming: "We're fucked, We're fucked!!"

Selling hope. And these days it's a growing market, it's the only growing market. And it's not even faith based.

Tis like that film, the title eludes me: "You can't handle the truth!"

The disintegration of the US hasn't even started yet and already the sun worshippers are claiming to see light at the end of the tunnel - it's more likely to be the effect of the embolism and is probably itself a symptom of the root of the illness. Not a single State has bottomed out and the infighting amongst the survivors is a ways off yet. Other countries, China in particular, are still exporting goods to the US and are being paid in promises. A promise won't buy that baby a new pair of shoes. Wait till that free meal is cut short...

I've said this in other posts and will say it in many more: Bootstrapping. No government, and very few media outlets, have paid it any attention. It is the single biggest influence on what has only started to arrive. We can survive what's coming but what amounts to prayer has no place in even being discussed, nevermind being implemented as a national policy. We're doing the same. We're up Shit Creek, the muppets with the paddles are all working against each other and the flow is taking us.

A few good men ...

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expects an energy bill to be ready for a vote within the next few weeks and a climate change bill to be ready by the end of the summer.

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2583/81/

Now that the stimulus bill has passed, Congress is moving on to more environment-specific
legislation. According to a recent AP interview,


The upcoming energy bill will focus on renewable energy and efficiency and will most likely include a national energy standard requiring 20 percent of the energy generated by utilities to come from renewable sources by 2020. A national standard has been proposed before unsuccessfully, but now that several states have passed their own mandates, it's likely to have a better shot this time around.

The senator also expects more tax incentives for energy efficiency, particularly in the construction and retro-fitting of buildings, to be included in the bill.

The climate change bill will concern actions necessary to slow down global warming and will most likely be put to a vote before the international climate negotiations happening in Copenhagen in December. The climate change bill is expected to be more controversial and involve topics like CO2 emission caps.

So far, it seems the new administration is keeping its promise to act quickly on energy and environmental issues. We'll be keeping close tabs on what comes of these bills and keeping our fingers crossed for effective legislation.

"In keeping with my committment to make our Government more open and transparent, this budget is an honest accounting of where wer are and where we're intend to go.

For too long our budget has not told the whole truth about how precious tax dollars are spent."

Obama puts his Keynsian tax and spend budget together, putting on hold lowering the deficit for the moment which will be 1.75 trillion this year according to the article below. He's hoping to leverage a war chest of nearly 4 trillion with which he will wage war on the ailing economy at home and intends to only spend 75bn in the external war in Iraq and Afghanistan this year.

He probably intends to make savings for one thing through energy conservation which will contribute monetarily over the long term.