The Bold Pursuit is pleased to present our first JWT's Journal, a column by John Wayne Tucker, former candidate for U.S. Congress, Missouri, Minister and Teacher.
On August 3, 2010, Missouri joined Arizona in the move to take back America and prevent the federal government from cramming things down their respective state throats. Missouri passed by an overwhelming margin a law called Prop C which allows the people of Missouri to opt out of Obamacare or opt into it. Prop C gave the choice to the citizens of the state of Missouri, not the federal government. This was an extreme statement regarding the attitude in Missouri regarding States’ Rights. In Arizona, of course, they passed SB1070, an extensive protection against illegal immigration. They did this because the federal government refused to carry out their obligations to protect the states from invasion. This could also be interpreted as a States’ Rights vote by the people of Arizona. Not only was it a requirement for their survival, but it made a strong statement that a state has the right to protect itself against invasion whether the federal government is willing to do so or not.
Both of these laws have been applauded and railed against throughout the United States and even in other countries. The federal government and Mexico have filed suit against Arizona for its law and the verdict is still out on Missouri’s objections.
Will these state rulings hold up against federal law? Many have already stated their belief that they will not, but the question is valid and is as old as the Union itself. The problem lies with the Bill of Rights, of course. The 10th Amendment states that any powers not specifically granted to the federal government under the Constitution go to the states. The Bill of Rights was put into the Constitution to protect the states from the kind of tyranny that they had just escaped by declaring Independence from England and they were not about to turn over all of their power to any national government. These first 10 Amendments were required by the states before they would sign on to the Constitution and they have turned out to be arguably, the most important part of the Constitution and the most attacked throughout the years.
So, will these laws by Missouri and Arizona stand? Do the states have the right to defy the federal government in these issues? Perhaps we should ask, does the federal government have the right to deny their Constitutional requirement to protect the borders and enforce the existing immigration laws? We should also ask, does the federal government have any authority whatsoever over health care in America and does it have the right to dictate to the states how they will run the health care? Of course, the issue of states’ rights has been THE issue since the beginning of the Union.
This country spent the first 100 years preparing for the Civil War and has spent the past 160 years trying to get over the Civil War and it seems that we have never resolved the thing that was the real issue of that war. The real issue and cause of the Civil War was States’ Rights (and Sectional Differences1) and it is still the very thing that divides us today.
Therefore, it is imperative that we watch Missouri and Arizona carefully. Whether these laws stand or not will determine the status of States’ Rights in America. There is no doubt that they will be the catalyst for a much more important struggle over this issue in the years to come.
John Wayne Tucker
Former Candidate for U. S. Congress
1. Even though Americans had a new feeling of national unity, different sections of the country still had very different interests. The industrial North competed with the agricultural South and the western frontier. As Congress favored one section over another, political differences also grew.
JWT’s Journal is an exclusive feature on The Bold Pursuit sm© The Bold Pursuit 2010, All Rights Reserved