NH Calls "Shenanigans"

Word is certainly getting out. (Although NH isn't unusual this year, apparently.)

Herewith, the NH House State-Federal Relations Committee hearings on HCR6: "affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles," 2/5/2009.

Surprise, surprise: unanimous testimony. Even the Representative who believes that there aren't really any hard limits intended on the feds' power still supports HCR6! This is soooo cool.

The Executive Session is scheduled for 2/12/2009. I expect to be posting video of that here, too.



But if you, like me, are particularly beguiled by NH Constitution Part First, Articles 7 & 10, revel in this 10-minute excerpt...




A response from (only) one of my Representatives to my instructions regarding HCR6 prompted further communication back on 2/1. Following is the bulk of my reply.


The text of HCR6 is dense, in the spirit and style -- when not in the very words -- of the founding documents, appropriately enough. If it were written for today's government-indoctrinated middle-schoolers, it would hardly be as powerful, nor as interesting, nor as serious. It reiterates the history, and original intentions and accepted justifications long ago conveniently ignored. It evokes the founding principles, with similar resolve. Let's face it: nothing else has worked. And I would assert that very soon (if not already) nothing will work.

"That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union ... and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own"

This is similar to, "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." It is thus my reading that, like the original contract, our course is not to be dependent on the respective decisions or requirements of other sovereign states -- although we trust they concur with our reasoning -- the original contract being between the states, not between the states and the federal government created by the contract.

No requirement for such concurrence is stipulated, however. They may take a similar course, or remain unintendedly subservient to the feds. Their choice. But as far as NH is concerned, "all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually." That was the original intent. Yet NH still wouldn't nullify the Constitution: the feds would have done that themselves by violating it, like any other contract. NH agreed to participate in the Republic, given that the federal government was to be limited. If it's no longer limited, the contract is no longer in effect. All HCR6 does is restate the obvious, and put the feds on notice that we're actually going to pay attention from here on.

"That any Act by the Congress [etc.] which assumes a power not delegated ... and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution"

Which again, this is the original intent. This does suggest that the resolution could be triggered by such acts even though they didn't directly affect NH. Invasion of the Confederacy, for example. Or, say, a Republic of Alaska.

To the assertion that "an accumulation of offenses, even though large, cannot substitute for a smoking gun," I must ask, if an "accumulation," even though large, isn't sufficient, then the loss of which specific intended state prerogative would constitute a smoking gun? Standing on principle is rarely convenient, and time is not on our side.

And thus the pot inexorably approaches boil. We have a country dense with drowsy frogs. The Alien and Sedition Acts. The War of Northern Aggression. The Federal Reserve. The 17th Amendment. The New Deal. The Great Society. The Welfare/(undeclared)Warfare state. The alphabet-soup of unauthorized federal agencies unilaterally passing unconstitutional de facto "law." The explosion in federal "crimes," precipitating, e.g., "federal police" (?!?) raids on lawful state commerce. The USAPATRIOT Act. NCLB. The Military Commissions Act. Extraordinary rendition. Suspension of habeas corpus. $1T wealth-redistribution "bailouts" with nonexistent money (lucky future generations don't get a vote, eh?). REAL ID. Manifestly unauthorized violations of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc., etc., etc. The ongoing and escalating transfer of extraordinary power from the states (where it belongs, where citizens can far more easily ride herd) to the feds, by the feds. By the hands of the states' own ostensible "representatives."

Who at the federal level will stand for state sovereignty now? No one. There's no reason to. It's not in their interest. Ron Paul is branded a crazy old man, an anachronism, given a "laugh track," for actually honoring his oath.

We must all consider where our line in the sand is. For some -- including, by their writings and actions, the Founders -- it's a time and condition long since passed.

To the assertion that this is primarily an exercise in futile and even marginalizing and alienating navel-gazing, it's true I don't expect it to get very far [yet now, a mere 5 days and one hearing later, I'm not so sure anymore], either (but I had similar concerns over REAL ID, so...). There's so little respect for, or even understanding of the rule of supreme law anymore that I've little doubt it will fall on many deaf and/or confused, even hostile ears, regardless of the language. We no longer have an electorate that even remotely appreciates liberty or why the government established to protect it was expressly limited.

We have, too, I'd wager, a strong majority of the state legislature, itself, that hasn't even read the Constitution it's sworn to uphold. How does an honorable individual do that?

Yet we also have a servant federal government that is more than happy to encourage and profit from the ignorance. The American Empire was built and is now crashing for lack of jealous citizen oversight. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, per se, but it's taking the original intended Republic with it, if anyone still cares. We're rapidly running out of time. We need the conversation. Desperately and soon.

"A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."
-John Adams-

"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility... I welcome it."
-John F. Kennedy-

"Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it political? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor political, nor popular - but one must take it simply because it is right."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.-

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
-Patrick Henry-

Here now, I might also add:

"Every normal man must be tempted at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."
-H.L. Mencken-

The conversation, I'm happy to report, has most definitely begun...

Somebody Hasn't Actually Contemplated Their Oath

216 "somebody"s, as it turns out... Have they even bothered to read what they've sworn to uphold?

Herewith, the rally and roll call vote on HCR6, "affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles." As you watch the floor debate in the 2nd half, remember that there was no public testimony against HCR6. None.

There were no arguments expressed against it in the State-Federal Relations Committee's shockingly perfunctory Executive Session. Zero.

The extremely limited coverage the mainstream media has deigned to provide (not to mention statements by Committee members in session) has suggested that legislators have been hearing a lot on this issue, yet none of them seems able to say any of it was remotely negative. There were hundreds of well-chilled voters who turned out on a work day to express their (to employ laughable understatement) strong approval for the resolution.

These "representatives" certainly aren't listening to their constituents. Who are they listening to? Whom do they serve?

And the arrogant hypocrite Rep. Rollo on the House floor disparages anyone who "thinks they know better" on this bill, but I guarantee you he believed he "knew better" on spending bills and regulation bills voted on in this very same chamber later on this very same day. He has no place whatsoever as my servant, and I want him fired.

Find out who your NH State Representatives are. Then locate them in the "HCR6 Roll Call" to find out how they voted on HCR6: whether they defend your unalienable liberty or they meekly turn it over to the feds (remember, they were voting on the Committee's recommendation to kill the resolution, not on the resolution, itself, so 'nay' is good). Then hold them accountable in November 2010. Here are mine:

Nay - Day, Russell(R)
Nay - Emerton, Larry(R)
Nay - Hikel, John(R)
Nay - Hodges, Kevin(D)
N/V - Holden, Rip(R)
Nay - Hopper, Gary(R)
Nay - Kurk, Neal(R)
Nay - Pratt, Calvin(R)

Good job, men. Thank you for understanding enumerated powers, limited government, states' rights/sovereignty, and intended liberty by local control.

Fellow citizens, this is your Republic the politicians are stealing. Your birthright. Your children's birthright. Do you care? If you're in NH (and why wouldn't you be?), hit the NH Liberty Alliance for help.

UPDATE: WMUR report



And here's just Rep Itse's Rally address.

Jeffersonian Principles and the Contract Between the Several States

Hey, if you're reading this, I'm fairly confident you grasp all of this already. But for those not reading this...

The Declaration of Independence stipulates:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

The US Constitution states:

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."

Article 1, Section 8, just for example, is pretty explicit about the extent of the general government's "delegated powers."

And according to the NH Constitution, Part First (Bill of Rights, which, interestingly enough, COMES FIRST in the NH Constitution -- oh, it's a fascinating document that way):

"[Art.] 7. [State Sovereignty.] The people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent state; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled."
June 2, 1784

and...

"[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."
June 2, 1784

(Those are my 2 absolute favorite articles. What are yours?)

Of course, it must be stated without equivocation that no revolution is even needed if a contract has, in fact, been broken. The contract is then simply null and void, the wronged parties free to walk away. (Or additionally sue, of course.) And any attempt by the offenders to continue to enforce such a clearly broken contract is pure, violent, indefensible aggression. Tantamount to brutish imperialism. Hardly what anyone could rationally characterize as "consensual." Let alone "civilized."

So, given increasingly frequent, blatant and unignorable US governmental transgressions against its charter -- i.e., breach of contract BY OUR SERVANTS -- in this 2009 session of the NH General Court (the NH legislature), Rep. Dan Itse submitted a modest bill, House Concurrent Resolution 6.

Essentially, HCR6 determines to hold the "general government" (that's [1] the national third of the "federal" form of government conceived as the Constitutional Republic, which also included [2] the People -- ostensibly represented in the general government by the US House of Representatives -- and [3] the States, the original signers of the contract establishing the national portion for mutual benefit, and originally represented by the US Senate, at least until the general government managed to get its purpose neutered via the 17th Amendment, of course -- so the original contracting parties are actually themselves no longer represented, with no remaining intended influence to keep governance local) -- where was I? oh, yeah -- hold the "general government" accountable for adherence to the contract between the several States known as the Constitution of the United States of America -- enumerated powers, Bill of (representative: remember Amendment IX) Rights, and all.

This shall be -- this must be -- New Hampshire's -- The Free State's -- line in the sand. Because finally, somebody must draw one. Let it be here. Let it be now.

The NH House's public hearing for HCR6 is scheduled for 2/5/2009 at 1:00pm in Rm 203 of the Legislative Office Building in Concord, NH. I would take it as a great personal favor if sufficient liberty lovers turned out to force them to move the whole shindig over to Representatives' Hall, across the street in the State House.

To my Representatives, and the State-Federal Relations Committee,

I support NH's Constitutionally guaranteed sovereignty. I support the NH General Court's (US Constitution) 10th Amendment and (NH Constitution) Part 1st, Articles 7 & 10 authority. They are the law. They are our contract. They are unalienable. They are our birthright.

I support "HCR6: Affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles." I trust you do, too.

And may someone once again channel Patrick Henry.

Contact the Committee and your Representatives. Attend the hearing. Stand up for your right to Constitutionally constrained government. Your general government certainly won't. But your state government just might if you instruct it to. Think REAL ID...

And don't stray too far. Gavel-to-gavel hearing video will be posted right here. Ya knew that was comin', right? This should be a hoot...

High Priests' 'New Clothes' Continue to Fade

"House Address" public hearings before the NH General Court's Joint Committee on Address, "for the removal of Philip Cross, marital master in the judicial branch family division in the Derry District Court, from his said office," morning session, 4/26/2010.

This is the first result -- the first officially documented "work product" fallout -- of the (unofficial, of course) "Legislators' Redress of Grievance Caucus'" (not a "committee," dammit!) "listening sessions" that House leadership has so desperately wanted to avoid that it has denied your representatives investigative accommodations within State office space. Find more on this long strange trip here.

Rep. Paul Ingbretson was a guest (again) on 'Capitol Access' (another video project involving your humble chronicler) just last week, discussing this very topic.

But first, the "Curious Timing Award" goes to... The (Merrimack County?) Sheriff's Department, who shows up to serve an arrest warrant on the primary witness, David Johnson -- a long-time, easy to find community member, and rather unlikely flight risk given the potential to further jeopardize contact with his daughter -- before his scheduled testimony in front of the legislative branch against the judicial branch. Hmm...

Cooler heads eventually prevail. Props to the NH State Police on State House duty who allegedly took some issue with the intended process. This is the same State Police detail that didn't overreact at the HCR6 brouhaha, and more recently have left State House 420 celebrants alone twice now...

Guest videographer, my own Rep. Gary Hopper delivers the money shot. Fascinating how law enforcement's attitude of blanket authority changes so quickly with as simple (and so minimally assured) a challenge as, essentially, "what's the law you're citing...?" Straight from "you don't have my permission" (well, you weren't asked for it) to "I'd appreciate it if you didn't" (y'know, you being government functionaries subject to RSA 91-A's exception to RSA 570-A, an' all -- not to mention your utter lack of anything remotely approximating a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in this pubic building WHILE WORKING FOR ME -- I'm infinitely more concerned with David's wishes than your own) just that quick. 'Course, "I'm a state Representative, and I am, too" doesn't hurt, either...

Lastly, I just gotta say, it never fails to make me feel just a little bit more secure in my person, papers and effects when I observe government agencies earnestly occupying themselves with opposing each other rather than cooperating in opposing me...




Part 1



Part 2

Another Stab at NH Sovereignty

The NH House State-Federal Relations Committee hears public testimony on HB1343, "establishing a joint committee on the constitutionality of acts, orders, laws, statutes, regulations, and rules of the government of the United States of America in order to protect state sovereignty," sponsored by the bipartisan team of Reps. Dan Itse, Paul Ingbreton, Tim Comerford, and Kris Roberts. It's popularly known as "Son of HCR6," last year's "NH sovereignty bill," regarding which, much video and commentary can be found elsewhere on this blog.

This is the sort of intended state-level deliberate and binding oversight of federal shenanigans that the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution utterly obliterated. It would be glorious to royally piss off the feds by establishing an end-around. The federal government was never intended to be the judge of the limits of its own authority. That is the domain of the states that created it. Eventually, one way or another, it's gonna be restored. Only a matter of time...

Federalist Paper 41, which Rep. Itse mentions, can be found, among other places, here.

First, of course, the spicy appetizer...



And the full hearing...

My Take: Dereliction of Duty

The NH House State-Federal Relations Committee holds a show tri-- er... an Executive Session on HCR6, on Jeffersonian principles and states' rights, arriving at the recommendation they will send to the full House. 2/12/2009

See the 2/5 public hearing here.

For developing details on the March 4th rally at the NH State House, hit the NH Liberty Alliance.

Also, Rep Itse is scheduled to be a guest on Glenn Beck on Fox News Channel, Friday, 2/13, at 5pm est (video here).

And contact your Representatives, if you're as outraged as I am.

Scenes from a Big Day at the State House

Many big bills addressed in hearings by NH House Committees this day, 2/17/2011. Education, parental rights, 'freedom to marry' (you can still "enjoy" some of the last go-round on this topic, which ultimately resulted in NH becoming the first state to recognize gay marriage without a court order, here -- it's unlikely the arguments have changed much...). Far too many to hit even many of them. So, here's a selection.

First up, this year's version of 2009's HCR6 -- NH's first 'sovereignty' bill. HCR19: 'affirming States' powers based on the Constitution for the United States and the Constitution of New Hampshire,' heard by the House State-Federal Relations Committee.

Here, co-sponsor freshman Rep. George "On the Job Means On the Record" Lambert speaks truth to power. Then the whole hearing, including the non-typical step (at least in the House) of an immediate 'Executive Session,' where the Committee votes on its recommendation to the whole House. The result was 'Ought to Pass,' 10-2. At about 0:42, Rep. Theberge exhibits some character when he protests voting to recommend a bill he professes he isn't "well-versed" on. More of the People's representatives -- especially at the federal level -- should show such honor, IMHO. However, as you can almost hear, he commences writing the "minority opinion" before the session even concludes! Now, if that opinion will be simply that House members should actually understand bills before they vote to pass them, shouldn't there be sufficient time to become educated by the time the House reads it? Surely he's not rendering judgment on the substance, on which he admits he's not "well-versed"... I'll be interested to learn his official objection, which will be printed in the relevant House Calendar for the scheduled floor vote, which is currently slated for 2/23.






Next, while I'm waiting for the 'Obamacare opt-out' bill, I sit in on HB225: 'relative to the return of personal property confiscated by law enforcement agencies from a person charged with a crime,' before the House Criminal Justice Committee. It would seem a non-controversial concept, wouldn't it? Surprisingly, the tone while I was there reflected that rational perception. The AG's office is there purely informationally? What else should they be there for? Isn't their job to enforce the laws we tell them to?




Finally, here we go. HB126: 'prohibiting interference with access to medical services and health insurance of New Hampshire citizens' -- Obamacare nullification, effectively -- before the House Commerce Committee. Don't miss the final speaker, who regales us with this revelation, from a government employee: force-based government thinks government is good. Presumably, more force-based government is good-er.

But let's lead off with co-sponsor freshman Rep. Andrew Manuse speaking more truth to power.

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE FASCISM!

Jesus Christ. What the hell does it take, people...?!?

This billboard is part of the Federal Government people's "Department of Homeland Security". You really do have to provide credentials to government people when they say "Papers Please". We don't even need to put on a fake German accent to drive home the oppression of that.

You can't vote to end this at a state level. So the question is, if NOW isn't the time to secede and leave the oppression of the FedGov behind, when is?

"DO YOU HAVE APPROVED TRAVEL DOCUMENTS."

"TO GET HOME!"

Are ya feelin' the chill yet? Ya really should.

Really...

Let's hope the entire NH legislature gets the message -- as it finally did for REAL ID -- for next session's anticipated enhanced version of HCR6, state sovereignty. But what will it take for our federal servants to get the hint? Do we really need to care...?

NH State Rep Dan Itse on 'Glenn Beck'

Discussing HCR6: "affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles," 2/13/2009.

EDIT: As of midday 2/15, NHLA forum membership has already close to doubled since this broadcast, a mere day and a half ago. Wow. Just wow...

Itse on ObamaCare

Are federal laws necessarily Constitutional by mere virtue of their passage? Was Congress really intended to be the arbiter of its own authority? Here by special request of the orator, Rep. Dan Itse addresses the NH House of Representatives, in the afternoon session of 5/13/2010, on an amendment to SB455 which would opt NH out of the Constitutionally unauthorized nationalized health care scheme, preceded by an introduction of the amendment by its sponsor, Rep. Gene Chandler. Complete session video can be found here.

The stirring address by "the Representative from Weare," Neal Kurk, regarding REAL ID nullification to which Itse refers may be viewed here. More on NH's nullification and sovereignty efforts, including the legendary HCR6, here.