Several states have begun to take power back from the Federal government. Perhaps this is the way re-empowerment of the people needs to be done. It seems like the accomplishment of any reform at the federal level quickly turns into a dog and pony show. Maybe we just have to tell the Federal government to go to hell. Some of us might be retaliated against. Since those of us with a little perspective understand that freedom isn't free, I hope more folks in more states will rally to the cause of getting the federal government more "right sized" and work to see that happen, even if for a while it's painful.


Obama44

South Carolina lawmakers have a proposal in their legislative pipeline that would nullify the federal Obamacare law.

Observers say the state likely will be the first in the nation to exempt citizens and businesses from participation in Obama’s Affordable Care Act.







Critics already have declared the bill is r****t and argue that federal law trumps state law. They charged that state lawmakers can’t opt out of the law because they don’t like President Obama.

The South Carolina bill prohibits state agencies and officers from implementing any portion of the federal mandate, outlaws state insurance exchanges and directs the state attorney general to sue over selective enforcement of the Affordable Health Care Act.

Supporters of the bill contend it aligns with a Founding Father’s solution for states confronted by an unwarranted federal law.

From James Madison come the instructions:

“Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular states, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the state; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any state, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large state, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining states happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”

House Bill 3101, called the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act, already has passed the House 65-34 and soon heads to the Senate.

The bill’s chief sponsor, state Sen. Tom Davis, said there are several components which “in my judgment are legal, effective and within the state’s power to do.”

First, it prohibits agencies, officers and employees of the state from incorporating Obamacare requirements. Only federal officials could implement each of the myriad functions of the program in the state.

Davis explained that case law establishes Washington cannot force states to enforce federal laws. Administration officials, he pointed out, acknowledged that limitation when they set up a federal exchange because so many states refused to establish their own.

Get “Taking America Back,” Joseph Farah’s manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

Other provisions outlaw state exchanges, issue tax deductions for those penalized and direct the attorney general to pursue certain lawsuits.

The South Carolina Senate has a GOP majority so the plan is expected to pass and then be signed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley, who opposes Obamacare.

Michael Maharrey, a spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates for states rights, told WND there’s a similar plan under development already in Oklahoma.

The center’s analysis of Madison’s writing outlines what it believes is the proper course for states.

The organization points out that “unwarrantable” literally means “unjustifiable.”

“Madison was clearly talking about federal acts with no constitutional justification. … But notice something interesting, Madison implies that state governments can even resist a ‘warrantable’ or justifiable federal act. So what does Madison suggest states do when the feds overstep their authority? Oppose it!”

The nullification idea already has been applied to issues ranging from gun regulation, driver’s license requirements and most recently, marijuana laws. The federal government folded when Colorado and Washington state made marijuana legal, despite a ban by the federal government.

The center’s model legislation for accomplishing nullification includes a rejection of the federal law, a specific act implementing the nullification and legal challenges as needed.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/s-carolina-aims-to-nullify-obamacare/#XWRom2YGS6t0PpBy.99

Several states have begun to take power back from the Federal government. Perhaps this is the way re-empowerment of the people needs to be done. It seems like the accomplishment of any reform at the federal level quickly turns into a dog and pony show. Maybe we just have to tell the Federal government to go to hell. Some of us might be retaliated against. Since those of us with a little perspective understand that freedom isn't free, I hope more folks in more states will rally to the cause of getting the federal government more "right sized" and work to see that happen, even if for a while it's painful.


Obama44

South Carolina lawmakers have a proposal in their legislative pipeline that would nullify the federal Obamacare law.
...
The South Carolina Senate has a GOP majority so the plan is expected to pass and then be signed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley, who opposes Obamacare.

...
The center’s model legislation for accomplishing nullification includes a rejection of the federal law, a specific act implementing the nullification and legal challenges as needed.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/s-carolina-aims-to-nullify-obamacare/#XWRom2YGS6t0PpBy.99

Several states have begun to take power back from the Federal government. Perhaps this is the way re-empowerment of the people needs to be done. It seems like the accomplishment of any reform at the federal level quickly turns into a dog and pony show. Maybe we just have to tell the Federal government to go to hell. Some of us might be retaliated against. Since those of us with a little perspective understand that freedom isn't free, I hope more folks in more states will rally to the cause of getting the federal government more "right sized" and work to see that happen, even if for a while it's painful.
this is the best news i have heard in years..... we will have to work to get the information out to all our other states to follow south carolina...
i also heard and read,about the convention of the states is at work... if you want to know more about this : go to
ALEC'S CONFERENCE BY MICHAEL FARRIS AND SEE VIDEO
ON UTUBE OR YOU CAN GOOGLE IT. IT IS A MASSIVE ACTION GOING ON AND I JUST SIGNED UP AS AN ACTIVE MEMBER TO
GET OUR COUNTRY BACK TO ITS CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES AND / NO MORE BIG GOVERNMENT. GO WATCH IT !!!
OUT COUNTRY IS WAKING UP FOLKS.

Obama44

South Carolina lawmakers have a proposal in their legislative pipeline that would nullify the federal Obamacare law.

Observers say the state likely will be the first in the nation to exempt citizens and businesses from participation in Obama’s Affordable Care Act.







Critics already have declared the bill is r****t and argue that federal law trumps state law. They charged that state lawmakers can’t opt out of the law because they don’t like President Obama.

The South Carolina bill prohibits state agencies and officers from implementing any portion of the federal mandate, outlaws state insurance exchanges and directs the state attorney general to sue over selective enforcement of the Affordable Health Care Act.

Supporters of the bill contend it aligns with a Founding Father’s solution for states confronted by an unwarranted federal law.

From James Madison come the instructions:

“Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular states, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the state; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any state, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large state, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining states happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”

House Bill 3101, called the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act, already has passed the House 65-34 and soon heads to the Senate.

The bill’s chief sponsor, state Sen. Tom Davis, said there are several components which “in my judgment are legal, effective and within the state’s power to do.”

First, it prohibits agencies, officers and employees of the state from incorporating Obamacare requirements. Only federal officials could implement each of the myriad functions of the program in the state.

Davis explained that case law establishes Washington cannot force states to enforce federal laws. Administration officials, he pointed out, acknowledged that limitation when they set up a federal exchange because so many states refused to establish their own.

Get “Taking America Back,” Joseph Farah’s manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

Other provisions outlaw state exchanges, issue tax deductions for those penalized and direct the attorney general to pursue certain lawsuits.

The South Carolina Senate has a GOP majority so the plan is expected to pass and then be signed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley, who opposes Obamacare.

Michael Maharrey, a spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates for states rights, told WND there’s a similar plan under development already in Oklahoma.

The center’s analysis of Madison’s writing outlines what it believes is the proper course for states.

The organization points out that “unwarrantable” literally means “unjustifiable.”

“Madison was clearly talking about federal acts with no constitutional justification. … But notice something interesting, Madison implies that state governments can even resist a ‘warrantable’ or justifiable federal act. So what does Madison suggest states do when the feds overstep their authority? Oppose it!”

The nullification idea already has been applied to issues ranging from gun regulation, driver’s license requirements and most recently, marijuana laws. The federal government folded when Colorado and Washington state made marijuana legal, despite a ban by the federal government.

The center’s model legislation for accomplishing nullification includes a rejection of the federal law, a specific act implementing the nullification and legal challenges as needed.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/s-carolina-aims-to-nullify-obamacare/#XWRom2YGS6t0PpBy.99

Several states have begun to take power back from the Federal government. Perhaps this is the way re-empowerment of the people needs to be done. It seems like the accomplishment of any reform at the federal level quickly turns into a dog and pony show. Maybe we just have to tell the Federal government to go to hell. Some of us might be retaliated against. Since those of us with a little perspective understand that freedom isn't free, I hope more folks in more states will rally to the cause of getting the federal government more "right sized" and work to see that happen, even if for a while it's painful.


Obama44

South Carolina lawmakers have a proposal in their legislative pipeline that would nullify the federal Obamacare law.

Observers say the state likely will be the first in the nation to exempt citizens and businesses from participation in Obama’s Affordable Care Act.







Critics already have declared the bill is r****t and argue that federal law trumps state law. They charged that state lawmakers can’t opt out of the law because they don’t like President Obama.

The South Carolina bill prohibits state agencies and officers from implementing any portion of the federal mandate, outlaws state insurance exchanges and directs the state attorney general to sue over selective enforcement of the Affordable Health Care Act.

Supporters of the bill contend it aligns with a Founding Father’s solution for states confronted by an unwarranted federal law.

From James Madison come the instructions:

“Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular states, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the state; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any state, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large state, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining states happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”

House Bill 3101, called the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act, already has passed the House 65-34 and soon heads to the Senate.

The bill’s chief sponsor, state Sen. Tom Davis, said there are several components which “in my judgment are legal, effective and within the state’s power to do.”

First, it prohibits agencies, officers and employees of the state from incorporating Obamacare requirements. Only federal officials could implement each of the myriad functions of the program in the state.

Davis explained that case law establishes Washington cannot force states to enforce federal laws. Administration officials, he pointed out, acknowledged that limitation when they set up a federal exchange because so many states refused to establish their own.

Get “Taking America Back,” Joseph Farah’s manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

Other provisions outlaw state exchanges, issue tax deductions for those penalized and direct the attorney general to pursue certain lawsuits.

The South Carolina Senate has a GOP majority so the plan is expected to pass and then be signed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley, who opposes Obamacare.

Michael Maharrey, a spokesman for the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates for states rights, told WND there’s a similar plan under development already in Oklahoma.

The center’s analysis of Madison’s writing outlines what it believes is the proper course for states.

The organization points out that “unwarrantable” literally means “unjustifiable.”

“Madison was clearly talking about federal acts with no constitutional justification. … But notice something interesting, Madison implies that state governments can even resist a ‘warrantable’ or justifiable federal act. So what does Madison suggest states do when the feds overstep their authority? Oppose it!”

The nullification idea already has been applied to issues ranging from gun regulation, driver’s license requirements and most recently, marijuana laws. The federal government folded when Colorado and Washington state made marijuana legal, despite a ban by the federal government.

The center’s model legislation for accomplishing nullification includes a rejection of the federal law, a specific act implementing the nullification and legal challenges as needed.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/s-carolina-aims-to-nullify-obamacare/#XWRom2YGS6t0PpBy.99

Is it your contention, then, that we should continue to allow the usurpation of personal liberty by the Federal government? After this President gets done dressing up our military in doll clothes he may find them...uncooperative if it comes down to it. I predict that if this idea takes root there could be a hell of a lot more defiance of an overreaching Federal government. In fact some, myself included, might come to think of it as our civic duty.

Perhaps you are at an age where it doesn't make that much of a damn to you. Fair enough. I'm not far from that myself, but my daughter isn't, and I'd like for her to be a strong, independent woman, and everything this administration does is about making people feel helpless and victimized.

Is it your contention, then, that we should continue to allow the usurpation of personal liberty by the Federal government? After this President gets done dressing up our military in doll clothes he may find them...uncooperative if it comes down to it. I predict that if this idea takes root there could be a hell of a lot more defiance of an overreaching Federal government. In fact some, myself included, might come to think of it as our civic duty.

Perhaps you are at an age where it doesn't make that much of a damn to you. Fair enough. I'm not far from that myself, but my daughter isn't, and I'd like for her to be a strong, independent woman, and everything this administration does is about making people feel helpless and victimized.

Hey, it's BigMike!
What's all the hubbub, bub?

I don't know what happened in our culture where the talk of losing liberty as if what is going on today is the same as the red coats martial law of Boston in 1763.
So where was all this talk of losing liberty a few years ago when the government allowed helpless sick and injured from being denied the right to buy a plan? You know you can't truly have liberty if the government allows those with the ability to take it away from others.

I agree, this could take root but if folks put matters in perspective compared to the least fortunate, I think it will dissolve.