Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Nullification? Or Convention of States?

You and I live in a period of United States history, in which our government enjoys an unprecedented amount of license in dictating our lives.

It's true.

They regulate the type of lightbulbs we can use, the type of medications we can consume, the kinds of toilets we are allowed to dispose of our waste in, how big our sodas can be.

The list of regulations spawned by extra-governmental agencies is enormous. This growing consciousness of being controlled have led many, from various walks of life, to pursue calling for a Constitutional Convention of States, otherwise known as an Article V Convention.

Article V of the U.S. Constitution was implemented as a way in which the people of the country could check an obtrusive bureaucracy. 

The reason that government ought to be checked is because, in the spirit of Lockien philosophy that informed the creation of our nation, men ought to be free to pursue their own path in life as long as they are not infringing upon the Natural Rights of others. This is the core of America, the very heart of our nation's reason for existence.

Some, within the Liberty movement have belittled the notion of a Convention of States, at which new amendments would be proposed and ratified into our Constitution to set a precedent for limiting the abuse of bureaucratic power.

They say that nullification is a simpler, more straightforward route, and that a Convention is unnecessary. This is wrong on two counts:

Firstly, nullification (the premise that any state can deem a federal law as unconstitutional, thus voiding its legality) is a process open to legal challenge. This idea has never been upheld in federal courts (Gee, I wonder why), which makes perfect sense if you think about it. After all, this is the federal court system that upheld the nationalization of the healthcare market (not to mention the mandates for citizens to pony up to cover the massive cost) as Constitutional. This is the federal court system that ruled it was legal to murder infants for expediency sake, despite the guarantee of the Natural right to life that the babies were due.

A government drunk on power will never willingly give up its authority. That is why Article V exists.

Secondly, nullification is typically a lone-wolf action. One state may say such a law is unconstitutional and try to nullify it, but without the cooperation of other states, and the broader consensus of the people it will not hold water. Nullification has never been upheld when challenge.

This is why a Convention of States is necessary if we are to preserve our Republic, which has undergone a massive recurring assault by Statist ideology for the last century. 

A Convention of States effectively amends the current law indefinitely. It may be challenged, but if the amendment is ratified into the Constitution it is much harder to undo than a legal challenge to nullification. It also allows the opportunity for a show of unprecedented force. Dictatorships or oligarchies only retain their power by consent. 

Those who agree to be ruled are base of all tyrannical control. If that base is removed and those in power see they have no influence over those they rule, they will back down or else face the wrath of the many. A Convention of States allows the people to come together once again and claim their birthright as citizens who create and institute government, not ones who are subject to it. 

It will be a more involved struggle to be sure, yet it is the right course for the American people to take. Our cause is just, and the history of freedom is on our side. Ask your legislator to sponsor or support Convention of States resolutions in your state today! Be the voice who will make history.

It's up to us now.

No comments: