Towards a 10th Amendment Revival


June 20, 2006, 09:30 PM
I have a proposal which is currently going to be sent to the Libertarian Party. It is a proposal based upon theoretical meanderings late at night over coffee and cigarettes, reading just about every Constitutional History book I could get my hands on since I was 16 or so to now, and talks with both liberal and conservative people unhappy with our current political parties.

This proposal is simple.

Instead of the Libertarian Party focusing on purity tests, removing government from all portions of your life, and running for the Presidency on platforms which are laughed at, I have a very simple propossal.

A return to state's rights, and prerogatives, elimination of IRS, and income tax on the federal level, and power resting on regional and state level decisions in more direct voting systems.

I realized that we didn't get to the massive behemoth of a fedgov we have today overnight, but instead by the people deciding piece by piece that they wanted one thing or another, and then the fedgov providing it. If we want a decent, and responsible fedgov, we will need it to be involved in as little as possible.

The problem with both the Democrats and the Republicans is that they are urging on this gutting of the states right's and responsibilites. Look at books by Jesse Jackson Jr. and you have the basic plot on the left. As for the Right, they want it phased in over time.

What of the Greens. They want it RFN! They are advocates of even more federal power than the Democrats.

What of the Constitutionalists? While not nearly as bad, they are scary theocrats.

The Libertarians are the best hope for this, but so far they have been seeing so far ahead for so long, they don't realize incrementalism is what is necessary to bring us back.

Many Liberals and Conservatives think the federal government is too big, too bloated, and too powerfull, but they want the social programs it provides. Ultimately, the government becomes a neccessary evil literally for them. My suggestion is that the fedgov give the social welfare programs back to the states to do with as they see fit.

Most Conservatives see elimination of those programs. Whereas most Liberals see more efficient usage of the tax dollars. Either way, a government on the federal level which does follow the Constitution entiely means a much more stable country overall.

I suggest 50 laboratories. 50 places where we get to experiment with Republic. If Massachusetts wants public healthcare, they can have it, but it is not forced down the throats of people in Montana, Wyoming, Georgia, etc. If Texas wants abortions banned they have it. If New York has a whack 'em attitude, so be it. You either vote with your feet, or you work for change on a state level. States would even decide their laws concerning drug policy. Even though many people in Mass, NY, and Kali would be mad, guns would be a state level thing as well. Which could easily mean plenty of states developing extremely reasonable laws. If you don't like Kali, vote with your feet, or fight for change.

Talking about the elimination of SSI and all forms of welfare gets the Libertarians nowhere. People have come to love their chains and will not get rid of them until they see how life is without all that government interference. Allow a state like Utah, Nevada, or Texas to have a private retirement account program, independent of the fedgov, and people will demand an end to SS.

This is my plan, I submit it to you for review, criticism, and hopefully, approval.

If you enjoyed reading about "Towards a 10th Amendment Revival" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
June 20, 2006, 09:45 PM
I suspect we will get a variant of what you want but not through the 10th Amendment, through balkanization.

June 20, 2006, 10:39 PM
that's not exactly going to be news to the LP. states rights is the basis for what most of them/us have pushed for for decades. If you set the context of your proposal with statements like these Instead of the Libertarian Party focusing on purity tests, removing government from all portions of your life, and running for the Presidency on platforms which are laughed at,, you'll be dismissed out of hand, as entirely uneducated. Try to avoid insulting people before you ask them to listen to your input.

June 20, 2006, 11:39 PM
taliv, I understand what you are talking about, but I wasn't born yesterday. I read Libertarian books, get on the internet and see their blogs, and look at the National and State Parties. They are living in a dream world. They are still running around selling "no government" to the public. And the public ain't ready for it.

Look at income tax. They said income tax would only effect the top 5% of society. If the advocates of the current system had run in declaring people who make a middle class living can expect 50% of all they make, buy, sell, etc. to be taxed, they would have been laughed at. If FDR had admitted that SS was a Ponzi Scheme, he would have been laughed at. Incremental changes when people were ready for them is what led to our current system.

Well, right now many people are angry over wiretaps, warrantless searches, asset forfeiture,terror laws allowing for abrogation of the 5th Amendment, 50% tax, bureacrats at all levels in our pocketbooks and bedrooms (and these are concerns amongst both right and left thinking folks), and all that is needed is an incremental push by the Libertarians.

But telling 60 year olds we want to destroy SSI and Medicare, and telling military vets we want to reduce our military to a defensive one, and telling people with children in public school we want to take away federal funding is going to create enemies. People will laugh at us, just as they have. The Libertarian Party has advocated state power, but not state welfare. I'm saying, if the Libertarian Party doesn't move now, they won't get another opportunity like exists right now for quite awhile. Maybe never again.


Unfortunately, you may prove correct. But, if it happens that way, our children, and Mexico's transplants will fight a brutal war (along with some of us) and I think my way will be much more peacefull and better in the long run. That is if anyone in Libertarian central applies this, or if anyone in the major parties is paying attention.

June 21, 2006, 12:06 AM
Though admirable...I'm not as optimistic as you are. Your main obstacle will be apathy&ignorance. Living in southern California will be a model for the rest of the Nation as we are continually illegaly colonized by the third world south of the 33rd parallel. Their political system is Socialism. As they grow in numbers, California's representation in Congress will be dominant. California will be making all the decisions for the Nation. Eventually, through numbers...California will have the clout to change the Constitution.

Gray Peterson
June 21, 2006, 12:25 AM
California's representation will not allow it to change the federal constitution. No matter how much the state grows in population, they still only have 2 Senators. In order to "dominate" politics, they'd need at least 100 million people in the state, and they only have 35 million at the moment.

June 21, 2006, 02:10 AM
While apathy is potentially bad, it can work to our advantage. All we need is enough votes to sucessfully do this.

By the way, the Senate was the original protector of state's rights. Although the 17th Amendment crippled it by stopping states from deciding who goes to the Senate directly, because every state gets 2 Senators, it prevents some of the worse abuses that would be possible if larger population states were allowed to run rough shod on smaller states.

If California decided to attempt a ConCon unilaterally, it would find itself and independent country. Regardless of what some here would say, that ain't goin' down. (Except in a longeyes scenario)

If you enjoyed reading about "Towards a 10th Amendment Revival" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!