Please listen Monday, November 2 at 8am central time
Susan will be a guest on the Mike Church Show on Sirius Patriot Radio
to discuss the State Sovereignty Resolution.
About Me
- ...
- Business, Free Enterprise and Constitutional Issues; Pro-Life and Pro Second Amendment. Susan Lynn is a member of the Tennessee General Assembly. She serves as Chairman of the Consumer and Human Resources subcommittee, a member of the Finance Ways and Means Committee and the Ethics Committee. She holds a BS in economics and a minor in history.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Tennessee Proclaims White Ribbons Against Pornography Week
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion08686.shtml
by Staff October 30, 2009
NASHVILLE, (christiansunite.com) -- October 25-November 1, 2009, is White Ribbon Against Pornography Week ( www.moralityinmedia.org). The State of Tennessee proclamation encourages citizens to recognize WRAP Week by wearing or displaying white ribbons as a sign of their commitment to community standards of decency and to show support for the enforcement of obscenity laws. White ribbons may be purchased at www.wrapfamily.com. An excerpt from the Tennessee proclamation states:
"Whereas, pornography degrades and dehumanizes both female and male participants; and Whereas, pornography presents youth with a false and distorted image of human sexuality, devoid of love, commitment, and responsibility; andWhereas, pornography features criminal and other anti-social behaviors, including adultery, bestiality, incest, child abuse, prostitution, teen promiscuity, unsafe sex, and the degradation, rape, and torture of women; andWhereas, pornography leads males and females into sexual addictions that prevent and tear marriages apart; and
Whereas, the explosion of obscenity helps create the demand for women and children trafficked into sexual slavery; and
Whereas, the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment does not protect obscenity and that legitimate governmental interests are furthered by enforcing obscenity laws, including the protection of morality, public safety, the community environment, and family life; and
Whereas, a poll conducted by Harris Interactive in July 2006 found that 73 percent of adult Americans think that viewing pornographic Web sites and videos is morally unacceptable; therefore,
I, Kent Williams, Speaker of the House of Representatives of the One Hundred Sixth General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, at the request of and in conjunction with Representative Susan Lynn, do hereby proclaim that we recognize October 25 through November 1, 2009, as "White Ribbon Against Pornography Week" in Tennessee and encourage all citizens to wear or display white ribbons as a sign of their commitment to community standards of decency and their support for enforcement of laws against obscene materials."
Girls Against Porn would like to thank Representative Susan Lynn, of the 57th House District, and the State of Tennessee House of Representatives for proclaiming it WRAP Week.
Girls Against Porn is an on-line resource and action coalition for women who have a loved one involved in porn, and for anyone who wishes to assist in the fight against porn and support the enforcement of obscenity laws.
by Staff October 30, 2009
NASHVILLE, (christiansunite.com) -- October 25-November 1, 2009, is White Ribbon Against Pornography Week ( www.moralityinmedia.org). The State of Tennessee proclamation encourages citizens to recognize WRAP Week by wearing or displaying white ribbons as a sign of their commitment to community standards of decency and to show support for the enforcement of obscenity laws. White ribbons may be purchased at www.wrapfamily.com. An excerpt from the Tennessee proclamation states:
"Whereas, pornography degrades and dehumanizes both female and male participants; and Whereas, pornography presents youth with a false and distorted image of human sexuality, devoid of love, commitment, and responsibility; andWhereas, pornography features criminal and other anti-social behaviors, including adultery, bestiality, incest, child abuse, prostitution, teen promiscuity, unsafe sex, and the degradation, rape, and torture of women; andWhereas, pornography leads males and females into sexual addictions that prevent and tear marriages apart; and
Whereas, the explosion of obscenity helps create the demand for women and children trafficked into sexual slavery; and
Whereas, the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment does not protect obscenity and that legitimate governmental interests are furthered by enforcing obscenity laws, including the protection of morality, public safety, the community environment, and family life; and
Whereas, a poll conducted by Harris Interactive in July 2006 found that 73 percent of adult Americans think that viewing pornographic Web sites and videos is morally unacceptable; therefore,
I, Kent Williams, Speaker of the House of Representatives of the One Hundred Sixth General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, at the request of and in conjunction with Representative Susan Lynn, do hereby proclaim that we recognize October 25 through November 1, 2009, as "White Ribbon Against Pornography Week" in Tennessee and encourage all citizens to wear or display white ribbons as a sign of their commitment to community standards of decency and their support for enforcement of laws against obscene materials."
Girls Against Porn would like to thank Representative Susan Lynn, of the 57th House District, and the State of Tennessee House of Representatives for proclaiming it WRAP Week.
Girls Against Porn is an on-line resource and action coalition for women who have a loved one involved in porn, and for anyone who wishes to assist in the fight against porn and support the enforcement of obscenity laws.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Great article in the Politico
Mandate insurance is unconstitutional
By: Ken Klukowski
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=6E1D8A47-18FE-70B2-A8BB46B59644DE2B
By: Ken Klukowski
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=6E1D8A47-18FE-70B2-A8BB46B59644DE2B
Special Joint Committee on Workers' Comp.
Committee working works toward lifting the burden on sub-contractors while protecting small business
A special committee for Workers’ Compensation met on Thursday afternoon to discuss the affects of Public Chapter 1041. Rep. Susan Lynn was appointed to serve on the committee by Chairman Judd Matheny. The goal of the committee is to lift the burden on sub-contractors while protecting small business from lawsuits.
PC 1041 was passed in 2008 and will go into affect on December 31, 2009. It requires sole proprietors, partners, and members of limited liability companies in the construction industry to be covered for workers compensation. There is an exception for construction owners with no employees who get paid exclusively from homeowners.
Implementation of the bill was already delayed once due to the concerns of small sub-contractors; those making less than $30,000 a year who may have to pay as much as $3000 to $6000 for premium on themselves.
The meeting had a number of speakers including Susan Ritter, Vice President of the Home Builders Association of TN. Ritter stated that according to the University of Tennessee, construction employment in Tennessee has fallen by 29,000 jobs; overall Tennessee has experienced an 80% drop in housing starts, and workers’ compensation premiums have fallen from a total of $12 million in 2008 to $6.4 million which shows that payrolls have dropped almost 50% this year.
Rep. Debra Maggart of Hendersonville stated that most legislators thought the bill would help small business owners because subs often elect not to be covered by workers’ comp due to the expense but after they suffer an injury they sue the small business owner and his or her workers’ comp must pay; this has been court president for since 1933. Insurance company representatives stated that this situation has been a concern for the insurance industry too because they must pay claims for people who have never paid premiums into the system.
Bob Pitts from the Workers’ Com. Advisory Council stated that workers’ compensation is a no fault insurance program to protect those who are injured. “This issue has been debated for about 33 years” and that “the legislation that the General Assembly passed in 2008 was debated for three years…there is no easy solution to this problem.”
The committee came up with a number of solutions; short term, to delay implementation; long term, to establish a minimum and maximum payroll for the construction industry where workers’ comp is concerned; project cost limitations such as for jobs under $30,000; reduce the loss cost multiplier; a deductable for the assigned risk plan; and, to do away with the need to be doubly insured - if one has health insurance with occupational coverage there would be no need to also have workers’ comp.
Labor and Workforce Development Commissioner, James Neeley, stated that he would take the liberty of giving 60 days on any fines or penalties in order to allow time for the General Assembly to act on legislation in January - thus voiding all fines and penalties should the General Assembly take action.
Chairman Matheny concluded the committee by thanking all who came to speak and stating that the Governor’s office has been very cooperative in helping to solve this issue.
##
A special committee for Workers’ Compensation met on Thursday afternoon to discuss the affects of Public Chapter 1041. Rep. Susan Lynn was appointed to serve on the committee by Chairman Judd Matheny. The goal of the committee is to lift the burden on sub-contractors while protecting small business from lawsuits.
PC 1041 was passed in 2008 and will go into affect on December 31, 2009. It requires sole proprietors, partners, and members of limited liability companies in the construction industry to be covered for workers compensation. There is an exception for construction owners with no employees who get paid exclusively from homeowners.
Implementation of the bill was already delayed once due to the concerns of small sub-contractors; those making less than $30,000 a year who may have to pay as much as $3000 to $6000 for premium on themselves.
The meeting had a number of speakers including Susan Ritter, Vice President of the Home Builders Association of TN. Ritter stated that according to the University of Tennessee, construction employment in Tennessee has fallen by 29,000 jobs; overall Tennessee has experienced an 80% drop in housing starts, and workers’ compensation premiums have fallen from a total of $12 million in 2008 to $6.4 million which shows that payrolls have dropped almost 50% this year.
Rep. Debra Maggart of Hendersonville stated that most legislators thought the bill would help small business owners because subs often elect not to be covered by workers’ comp due to the expense but after they suffer an injury they sue the small business owner and his or her workers’ comp must pay; this has been court president for since 1933. Insurance company representatives stated that this situation has been a concern for the insurance industry too because they must pay claims for people who have never paid premiums into the system.
Bob Pitts from the Workers’ Com. Advisory Council stated that workers’ compensation is a no fault insurance program to protect those who are injured. “This issue has been debated for about 33 years” and that “the legislation that the General Assembly passed in 2008 was debated for three years…there is no easy solution to this problem.”
The committee came up with a number of solutions; short term, to delay implementation; long term, to establish a minimum and maximum payroll for the construction industry where workers’ comp is concerned; project cost limitations such as for jobs under $30,000; reduce the loss cost multiplier; a deductable for the assigned risk plan; and, to do away with the need to be doubly insured - if one has health insurance with occupational coverage there would be no need to also have workers’ comp.
Labor and Workforce Development Commissioner, James Neeley, stated that he would take the liberty of giving 60 days on any fines or penalties in order to allow time for the General Assembly to act on legislation in January - thus voiding all fines and penalties should the General Assembly take action.
Chairman Matheny concluded the committee by thanking all who came to speak and stating that the Governor’s office has been very cooperative in helping to solve this issue.
##
Friday, October 23, 2009
Lynn to Chair Special Committee on State Sovereignty
The Special Committee on State Sovereignty met this week to fulfill the requirements of HJR 108; a resolution to the to the US Congress from the Tennessee General Assembly in support of the Tenth Amendment. The resolution calls for a committee of Conference and Correspondence to communicate the resolution to the legislatures of the several states, and to call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
State Representative Susan Lynn (R - Lebanon) was elected Chairman of the committee and State Representative Ron Lollar (R-Memphis) Secretary.
Representative Lynn proposed the letter below to send to the states. She authored the letter which outlines the purpose of American government, the abuses of the federal government and to ask for the states to join Tennessee in working to enumerate and repeal such actions.
The committee will additionally seek the assistance of the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Council of State Governments and the National Conference of State Legislatures. The committee will author a letter to the groups to asking for assistance in forming working groups of state legislators from the various states to create a plan of action to defend of the Tenth Amendment.
Others members of the committee are Senator Douglas Henry, Senator Bill Ketron, Senator Tim Burchett, Senator Randy McNally, Representative Phillip Johnson, Representative Richard Floyd.
The committee will meet again in a month.
Letter to the states
We send greetings from the Tennessee General Assembly. On June 23, 2009, House Joint Resolution 108, the State Sovereignty Resolution, was signed by Governor Phil Bredesen. The Resolution created a committee which has as its charge to:
· Communicate the resolution to the legislatures of the several states,
· Assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship,
· Call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government, and
· Seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
It is for that purpose that this letter addresses your honorable body.
In 1776, our founding fathers declared our freedom in the magnificent Declaration of Independence; our guide to governance. They established a nation of free and independent states. Declaring that the purpose of our political system is to secure for its citizens’ their natural rights. The Constitution authorizes the national government to carry out seventeen enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8 and the powers of several of the ensuing amendments.
At the time of the Constitutional ratification process James Madison drafted the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.
There are clear limits to the power of the federal government and clear realms of power for the states. However, the simple and clear expression of purpose, to secure our natural rights, has evolved into the modern expectation that the national government has an obligation to ensure our life, to create our liberty, and fund our pursuit of happiness.
The national government has become a complex system of programs whose purposes lie outside of the responsibilities of the enumerated powers and of securing our natural rights; programs that benefit some while others must pay.
Today, the federal government seeks to control the salaries of those employed by private business, to change the provisions of private of contracts, to nationalize banks, insurers and auto manufacturers, and to dictate to every person in the land what his or her medical choices will be.
Forcing property from employers to provide healthcare, legislating what individuals are and are not entitled to, and using the labor of some so that others can receive money that they did not earn goes far beyond securing natural rights, and the enumerated powers in the Constitution.
The role of our American government has been blurred, bent, and breached. The rights endowed to us by our creator must be restored.
To be sure, the People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.
The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the state governments, or locally, by the people themselves.
The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.
With this in mind, any federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a usurpation of state sovereignty - and unconstitutional.
Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. The people of a state know what is best for them; authorities, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives is opposed to the very notion of freedom.
We invite your state to join with us to form a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
In Liberty,
Susan Lynn
State Representative
State Representative Susan Lynn (R - Lebanon) was elected Chairman of the committee and State Representative Ron Lollar (R-Memphis) Secretary.
Representative Lynn proposed the letter below to send to the states. She authored the letter which outlines the purpose of American government, the abuses of the federal government and to ask for the states to join Tennessee in working to enumerate and repeal such actions.
The committee will additionally seek the assistance of the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Council of State Governments and the National Conference of State Legislatures. The committee will author a letter to the groups to asking for assistance in forming working groups of state legislators from the various states to create a plan of action to defend of the Tenth Amendment.
Others members of the committee are Senator Douglas Henry, Senator Bill Ketron, Senator Tim Burchett, Senator Randy McNally, Representative Phillip Johnson, Representative Richard Floyd.
The committee will meet again in a month.
Letter to the states
We send greetings from the Tennessee General Assembly. On June 23, 2009, House Joint Resolution 108, the State Sovereignty Resolution, was signed by Governor Phil Bredesen. The Resolution created a committee which has as its charge to:
· Communicate the resolution to the legislatures of the several states,
· Assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship,
· Call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government, and
· Seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
It is for that purpose that this letter addresses your honorable body.
In 1776, our founding fathers declared our freedom in the magnificent Declaration of Independence; our guide to governance. They established a nation of free and independent states. Declaring that the purpose of our political system is to secure for its citizens’ their natural rights. The Constitution authorizes the national government to carry out seventeen enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8 and the powers of several of the ensuing amendments.
At the time of the Constitutional ratification process James Madison drafted the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.
There are clear limits to the power of the federal government and clear realms of power for the states. However, the simple and clear expression of purpose, to secure our natural rights, has evolved into the modern expectation that the national government has an obligation to ensure our life, to create our liberty, and fund our pursuit of happiness.
The national government has become a complex system of programs whose purposes lie outside of the responsibilities of the enumerated powers and of securing our natural rights; programs that benefit some while others must pay.
Today, the federal government seeks to control the salaries of those employed by private business, to change the provisions of private of contracts, to nationalize banks, insurers and auto manufacturers, and to dictate to every person in the land what his or her medical choices will be.
Forcing property from employers to provide healthcare, legislating what individuals are and are not entitled to, and using the labor of some so that others can receive money that they did not earn goes far beyond securing natural rights, and the enumerated powers in the Constitution.
The role of our American government has been blurred, bent, and breached. The rights endowed to us by our creator must be restored.
To be sure, the People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.
The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the state governments, or locally, by the people themselves.
The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.
With this in mind, any federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a usurpation of state sovereignty - and unconstitutional.
Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. The people of a state know what is best for them; authorities, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives is opposed to the very notion of freedom.
We invite your state to join with us to form a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
In Liberty,
Susan Lynn
State Representative
ALEC Healthcare Release
PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release: Contact: Jorge Amselle
October 22, 2009 (202) 742-8536
jamselle@alec.org
Rep. Susan Lynn Tells Congress “No” to ObamaCare
Joins 1,800 State Lawmakers in Nationwide Effort to Preserve States’ Rights; Stop Single-Payer
NASHVILLE, TN – State Representative Susan Lynn (R-Lebanon) signed onto an official letter from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to Congressional leaders expressing the will of more than 1,800 state legislators opposing federal reform efforts—particularly, the Medicare-modeled “public plan” and a national health insurance exchange—which will trample states’ rights and lead Americans down the road to single-payer health care.
“Constitutionally, insurance is not the domain of the federal government but of the states,” said Rep. Lynn. “The real problem is that over the last 35 years states have allowed health insurance products to morph in ways that have served to hurt consumers - this problem started in the states and the solution lies with the states. A federal solution will not fix the problems within the states - it is past time we roll-up our sleeves and change things on the state level.”
The members of ALEC—the nation’s largest nonpartisan, individual membership association of state legislators—recently approved the Resolution on Preserving States’ Rights Regarding Federal Health Insurance Exchanges and a Public Plan, which deems the federal public plan anti-competitive and calls the proposed national health insurance exchange a “federal takeover” of the states’ role in regulating health insurance.
“The government will never compete unless it can change the rules to win,” says Iowa Representative Linda Upmeyer, minority whip, family nurse practitioner, and chair of ALEC’s Health and Human Services Task Force. “It’s an unlevel playing field when a public plan can shift costs to our state’s private insurers because of low doctor and hospital reimbursement rates, and then raid the federal Treasury for unlimited subsidies,” she added.
In the ALEC letter to Congress, ALEC’s lawmakers criticized the federal push to shift health care decisionmaking to Washington. “We all share the goal that patients deserve to choose their own quality, affordable, private health coverage,” the letter states. “But health reform shouldn’t just be the job of the federal government.”
—30—
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is the nation's largest nonpartisan, individual membership organization of state legislators.
For Immediate Release: Contact: Jorge Amselle
October 22, 2009 (202) 742-8536
jamselle@alec.org
Rep. Susan Lynn Tells Congress “No” to ObamaCare
Joins 1,800 State Lawmakers in Nationwide Effort to Preserve States’ Rights; Stop Single-Payer
NASHVILLE, TN – State Representative Susan Lynn (R-Lebanon) signed onto an official letter from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to Congressional leaders expressing the will of more than 1,800 state legislators opposing federal reform efforts—particularly, the Medicare-modeled “public plan” and a national health insurance exchange—which will trample states’ rights and lead Americans down the road to single-payer health care.
“Constitutionally, insurance is not the domain of the federal government but of the states,” said Rep. Lynn. “The real problem is that over the last 35 years states have allowed health insurance products to morph in ways that have served to hurt consumers - this problem started in the states and the solution lies with the states. A federal solution will not fix the problems within the states - it is past time we roll-up our sleeves and change things on the state level.”
The members of ALEC—the nation’s largest nonpartisan, individual membership association of state legislators—recently approved the Resolution on Preserving States’ Rights Regarding Federal Health Insurance Exchanges and a Public Plan, which deems the federal public plan anti-competitive and calls the proposed national health insurance exchange a “federal takeover” of the states’ role in regulating health insurance.
“The government will never compete unless it can change the rules to win,” says Iowa Representative Linda Upmeyer, minority whip, family nurse practitioner, and chair of ALEC’s Health and Human Services Task Force. “It’s an unlevel playing field when a public plan can shift costs to our state’s private insurers because of low doctor and hospital reimbursement rates, and then raid the federal Treasury for unlimited subsidies,” she added.
In the ALEC letter to Congress, ALEC’s lawmakers criticized the federal push to shift health care decisionmaking to Washington. “We all share the goal that patients deserve to choose their own quality, affordable, private health coverage,” the letter states. “But health reform shouldn’t just be the job of the federal government.”
—30—
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is the nation's largest nonpartisan, individual membership organization of state legislators.
Thank you Edgycater.blogspot.com
Thank you Edgycater.blobspot.com for your post;
http://edgycater.blogspot.com/2009/10/patriot-stands-tennessee-state.html
http://edgycater.blogspot.com/2009/10/patriot-stands-tennessee-state.html
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
First Draft of Letter to the States
I really wanted to include some additional history in the letter to the states on state sovereignty but it was just too long but here is the first draft of the letter.
We send greetings from the Tennessee General Assembly. On June 23, 2009, House Joint Resolution 108, the State Sovereignty Resolution, was signed by Governor Phil Bredesen. The Resolution created a committee which has as its charge to:
· Communicate the resolution to the legislatures of the several states,
· Assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship,
· Call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government, and
· Seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
On July 4, 1776 our founding fathers declared their independence from the government of Great Britain; thus the united colonies became free and independent states.
The Declaration of Independence established the American view of the rights of man and the duties of government. “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.” They concluded by stating that our “separate but equal station” with Britain and other governments of the world would give us “full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.”
In 1787, using the model of the Declaration of Independence as a guide to governance, and following the short lived Articles of Confederation; a Constitution was written which provides seventeen specific powers of the federal government (Article 1, Section 8).
In 1789, a Bill of Rights was crafted because “the Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers”; thus “extending the ground of public confidence in the Government.”
The Bill of Rights consists of natural rights and rights that serve to secure our natural rights. They make clear that all natural rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights are protected, and clarify that powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved for the states and the people. The ensuing amendments either do likewise or establish additional powers and terms for our government.
Therefore, we are a collection of free and independent states; the purpose of our political system is to secure for its citizens’ their natural rights; and our national government is authorized to carry out the seventeen enumerated powers and powers of the ensuing amendments.
At the time of the Constitutional ratification process James Madison drafted the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.
So there are clear limits to the power of the federal government. However, today the simple and clear expression of purpose has turned into the modern expectation that the national government has an obligation to ensure our life, to create our liberty, and fund our pursuit of happiness. The national government has become a complex system of programs whose purposes lie outside of the responsibilities of the enumerated powers and of securing our natural rights; programs that benefit some while others must pay.
Today, the federal government seeks to control the salaries of those employed by private business, to change the provisions of private of contracts, to nationalize banks, insurers and auto manufacturers, and to dictate to every person in the land what his or her medical choices will be.
Forcing property from employers to provide healthcare, legislating what individuals are and are not entitled to, and using the labor of some so that others can receive money that they did not earn goes far beyond securing natural rights and the enumerated powers.
The role of our American government has been blurred, bent, and breached. Adherence to the specific powers and the fundamental American ideal that our government is based on the theory of natural rights expressed ever so simply as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and that no government can deny these rights; the rights endowed to us by our creator must be restored.
To be sure, the People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.
The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the state governments, or locally, by the people themselves.
The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.
With this in mind, any federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a usurpation of state sovereignty - and unconstitutional.
Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. The people of a state know what is best for them; authorities, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives is opposed to the very notion of freedom.
We invite your state to join with us to form a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
We send greetings from the Tennessee General Assembly. On June 23, 2009, House Joint Resolution 108, the State Sovereignty Resolution, was signed by Governor Phil Bredesen. The Resolution created a committee which has as its charge to:
· Communicate the resolution to the legislatures of the several states,
· Assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship,
· Call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government, and
· Seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
On July 4, 1776 our founding fathers declared their independence from the government of Great Britain; thus the united colonies became free and independent states.
The Declaration of Independence established the American view of the rights of man and the duties of government. “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.” They concluded by stating that our “separate but equal station” with Britain and other governments of the world would give us “full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.”
In 1787, using the model of the Declaration of Independence as a guide to governance, and following the short lived Articles of Confederation; a Constitution was written which provides seventeen specific powers of the federal government (Article 1, Section 8).
In 1789, a Bill of Rights was crafted because “the Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers”; thus “extending the ground of public confidence in the Government.”
The Bill of Rights consists of natural rights and rights that serve to secure our natural rights. They make clear that all natural rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights are protected, and clarify that powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved for the states and the people. The ensuing amendments either do likewise or establish additional powers and terms for our government.
Therefore, we are a collection of free and independent states; the purpose of our political system is to secure for its citizens’ their natural rights; and our national government is authorized to carry out the seventeen enumerated powers and powers of the ensuing amendments.
At the time of the Constitutional ratification process James Madison drafted the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.
So there are clear limits to the power of the federal government. However, today the simple and clear expression of purpose has turned into the modern expectation that the national government has an obligation to ensure our life, to create our liberty, and fund our pursuit of happiness. The national government has become a complex system of programs whose purposes lie outside of the responsibilities of the enumerated powers and of securing our natural rights; programs that benefit some while others must pay.
Today, the federal government seeks to control the salaries of those employed by private business, to change the provisions of private of contracts, to nationalize banks, insurers and auto manufacturers, and to dictate to every person in the land what his or her medical choices will be.
Forcing property from employers to provide healthcare, legislating what individuals are and are not entitled to, and using the labor of some so that others can receive money that they did not earn goes far beyond securing natural rights and the enumerated powers.
The role of our American government has been blurred, bent, and breached. Adherence to the specific powers and the fundamental American ideal that our government is based on the theory of natural rights expressed ever so simply as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and that no government can deny these rights; the rights endowed to us by our creator must be restored.
To be sure, the People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.
The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the state governments, or locally, by the people themselves.
The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.
With this in mind, any federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a usurpation of state sovereignty - and unconstitutional.
Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. The people of a state know what is best for them; authorities, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives is opposed to the very notion of freedom.
We invite your state to join with us to form a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.
Tenth Amendment Center Mention
Thank you Tenth Amendment Center for mentioning my work on state sovereignty on your blog: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/10/20/they-cant-push-us-around-forever/#
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Wall Street Journal Mention
The Wall Street Journal wrote about my Tennessean article on LCFS
Tennessee Pols to Lamar Alexander: Forget About Low-Carbon Fuel Standards
In certain circles, Tennessee senator Lamar Alexander is a hero on energy matters. His relentless crusade for nuclear power, for instance, became virtually the sum total of GOP energy prescriptions. But that doesn’t mean all of Sen. Alexander’s energy ideas get a warm welcome—even within the Republican party.
His support for a low-carbon fuel standard—essentially a plan to penalize “dirty” fuels such as Canadian oil sands–is rankling some rank-and-file Republicans back in his native Tennessee.
State Rep. Susan Lynn fired off a letter last Friday chiding Sen. Alexander for even flirting with the idea; Sen. Alexander has repeatedly said that such a standard could help the environment without raising energy prices.
“At its core, a [low carbon fuel standard] would initiate a direct ban on the importation of some of our most secure and affordable sources of energy,” she wrote. “It would necessarily expand America’s already dangerous dependence on foreign, unstable energy from suppliers half-a-world away…”
She urged Sen. Alexander to use his position on the Senate Environment and Public Works committee “to stand up for the energy interests of Tennessee and prevent this plan from advancing any further.”
This is just the latest salvo in the low-carbon fuel wars—a public broadside against an energy policy that doesn’t actually exist.
There was a low-carbon fuel standard in the first version of the Waxman-Markey bill; it later disappeared. It has yet to appear in the Senate climate bill. Yet the very idea of a low-carbon fuel standard that could put Canadian oil off limits has the energy-security crowd mobilizing.
What’s interesting is that Rep. Lynn doesn’t just represent Tennessee’s 57th district. She also chairs the American Legislative Exchange Council’s task force on commerce, insurance, and economic development. ALEC is a group of about 2,000 state legislators fighting for free-market, small-government solutions and helps craft state-level legislation.
ALEC already bitterly opposed the cap-and-trade plans in Congress this year; it apparently finds a low-carbon fuel standard a sorry alternative. That doesn’t leave many options if Washington—or states—are going to tackle carbon emissions.
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/10/06/tennessee-pols-to-lamar-alexander-forget-about-low-carbon-fuel-standards/tab/print/
Tennessee Pols to Lamar Alexander: Forget About Low-Carbon Fuel Standards
In certain circles, Tennessee senator Lamar Alexander is a hero on energy matters. His relentless crusade for nuclear power, for instance, became virtually the sum total of GOP energy prescriptions. But that doesn’t mean all of Sen. Alexander’s energy ideas get a warm welcome—even within the Republican party.
His support for a low-carbon fuel standard—essentially a plan to penalize “dirty” fuels such as Canadian oil sands–is rankling some rank-and-file Republicans back in his native Tennessee.
State Rep. Susan Lynn fired off a letter last Friday chiding Sen. Alexander for even flirting with the idea; Sen. Alexander has repeatedly said that such a standard could help the environment without raising energy prices.
“At its core, a [low carbon fuel standard] would initiate a direct ban on the importation of some of our most secure and affordable sources of energy,” she wrote. “It would necessarily expand America’s already dangerous dependence on foreign, unstable energy from suppliers half-a-world away…”
She urged Sen. Alexander to use his position on the Senate Environment and Public Works committee “to stand up for the energy interests of Tennessee and prevent this plan from advancing any further.”
This is just the latest salvo in the low-carbon fuel wars—a public broadside against an energy policy that doesn’t actually exist.
There was a low-carbon fuel standard in the first version of the Waxman-Markey bill; it later disappeared. It has yet to appear in the Senate climate bill. Yet the very idea of a low-carbon fuel standard that could put Canadian oil off limits has the energy-security crowd mobilizing.
What’s interesting is that Rep. Lynn doesn’t just represent Tennessee’s 57th district. She also chairs the American Legislative Exchange Council’s task force on commerce, insurance, and economic development. ALEC is a group of about 2,000 state legislators fighting for free-market, small-government solutions and helps craft state-level legislation.
ALEC already bitterly opposed the cap-and-trade plans in Congress this year; it apparently finds a low-carbon fuel standard a sorry alternative. That doesn’t leave many options if Washington—or states—are going to tackle carbon emissions.
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/10/06/tennessee-pols-to-lamar-alexander-forget-about-low-carbon-fuel-standards/tab/print/
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Tennessean Column
Not Your Average Fuel Economy
By
Rep. Susan Lynn
Earlier this month, the Obama administration revealed its new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards which will require new vehicle fleets to average 35.5 mpg by 2016. You may recall an earlier announcement in May, but the details had not been worked out yet. As usual, the devil is in the details. Now we learn through a plan released jointly by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation that the new standards come with a subtle but startling twist. In addition to meeting more stringent fuel standards, for the first time new vehicles will have to meet greenhouse gas emission targets as well.
The campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this country is nothing new. Most notoriously, this summer the U.S. House of Representatives approved the Waxman Markey Cap-and-Trade bill designed to raise prices on the energy sources we rely on the most. But not everyone may be aware of an ongoing strategy to skirt Congress and implement greenhouse gas restrictions via the EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA). President Obama wasted no time instructing his EPA administrator Lisa Jackson in February to take the necessary steps to classify greenhouses gases, such as carbon dioxide, as pollutants, a necessary precondition for regulation.
This approach is almost universally recognized as problematic even by proponents of emissions cuts since the CAA is designed to control local pollutants, not ubiquitous and natural gases critical to life on the planet. But in a year of tea parties, spirited town halls and a more cautious upper chamber of Congress, proponents will take what they can get—even if it causes serious problems for the country and its economy. The new greenhouse gas vehicle emissions standard is just the beginning of a multi-step strategy to meet the goals of Waxman-Markey legislation without the nuisance of legislative approval.
Indeed, just seven days after the new vehicle standard was released the EPA announced it would begin monitoring greenhouse gas emissions from not just mobile sources like cars and trucks but stationary sources like businesses and energy sources. This gets tricky. To sidestep some of the larger (but not the only) problems associated with using the CAA, the EPA plans to ignore the CAA’s trigger emission level of 250 tons per year and arbitrarily substitute 25,000 tons per year. This might sound like good news for those who like to see the government tread as lightly as possible on our economy. The problem is this will surely invite litigation by environmentalists who want to see the CAA followed as written. The result will be a regulatory cascade in doses they hope will be small enough for us to swallow. Many are calling this move a breach in the separation of powers since the executive branch is blatantly manipulating the letter of the law to suit its own purposes. In response, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has indicated she will offer an amendment to EPA’s 2010 fiscal spending bill that would halt this effort to regulate stationary sources.
Fuel economy standards, even the ones we are used to, are misguided. Fuel efficiency gains drive up the price of cars and usually come at the additional cost of vehicle weight which makes our cars less safe. Couple this with an unprecedented greenhouse gas regulatory scheme and this administration is pushing the nation headlong down a tricky regulatory road that promises to cause legal, economic and safety problems for our country. Meanwhile many of us naively thought that when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we were making this decision together through our elected leaders in Congress.
Susan Lynn, R-Lebanon, is Chairman of the House Government Operations Committee and is in her fourth term.
This article was submitted in September but the newspaper published it on October 2nd - the first line should have been changed to say "last month."
By
Rep. Susan Lynn
Earlier this month, the Obama administration revealed its new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards which will require new vehicle fleets to average 35.5 mpg by 2016. You may recall an earlier announcement in May, but the details had not been worked out yet. As usual, the devil is in the details. Now we learn through a plan released jointly by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation that the new standards come with a subtle but startling twist. In addition to meeting more stringent fuel standards, for the first time new vehicles will have to meet greenhouse gas emission targets as well.
The campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this country is nothing new. Most notoriously, this summer the U.S. House of Representatives approved the Waxman Markey Cap-and-Trade bill designed to raise prices on the energy sources we rely on the most. But not everyone may be aware of an ongoing strategy to skirt Congress and implement greenhouse gas restrictions via the EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA). President Obama wasted no time instructing his EPA administrator Lisa Jackson in February to take the necessary steps to classify greenhouses gases, such as carbon dioxide, as pollutants, a necessary precondition for regulation.
This approach is almost universally recognized as problematic even by proponents of emissions cuts since the CAA is designed to control local pollutants, not ubiquitous and natural gases critical to life on the planet. But in a year of tea parties, spirited town halls and a more cautious upper chamber of Congress, proponents will take what they can get—even if it causes serious problems for the country and its economy. The new greenhouse gas vehicle emissions standard is just the beginning of a multi-step strategy to meet the goals of Waxman-Markey legislation without the nuisance of legislative approval.
Indeed, just seven days after the new vehicle standard was released the EPA announced it would begin monitoring greenhouse gas emissions from not just mobile sources like cars and trucks but stationary sources like businesses and energy sources. This gets tricky. To sidestep some of the larger (but not the only) problems associated with using the CAA, the EPA plans to ignore the CAA’s trigger emission level of 250 tons per year and arbitrarily substitute 25,000 tons per year. This might sound like good news for those who like to see the government tread as lightly as possible on our economy. The problem is this will surely invite litigation by environmentalists who want to see the CAA followed as written. The result will be a regulatory cascade in doses they hope will be small enough for us to swallow. Many are calling this move a breach in the separation of powers since the executive branch is blatantly manipulating the letter of the law to suit its own purposes. In response, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has indicated she will offer an amendment to EPA’s 2010 fiscal spending bill that would halt this effort to regulate stationary sources.
Fuel economy standards, even the ones we are used to, are misguided. Fuel efficiency gains drive up the price of cars and usually come at the additional cost of vehicle weight which makes our cars less safe. Couple this with an unprecedented greenhouse gas regulatory scheme and this administration is pushing the nation headlong down a tricky regulatory road that promises to cause legal, economic and safety problems for our country. Meanwhile many of us naively thought that when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we were making this decision together through our elected leaders in Congress.
Susan Lynn, R-Lebanon, is Chairman of the House Government Operations Committee and is in her fourth term.
This article was submitted in September but the newspaper published it on October 2nd - the first line should have been changed to say "last month."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)