Issue Position: Constitutional Government

Issue Position

I fervently believe in our founding document, the United States Constitution. At the age of 18, I took an oath at the US Air Force Academy to support and defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, both foreign and domestic. I take my oath seriously, and that will never diminish. Most politicians, if they bring it up, would likely say the same thing. But there is a difference between giving the Constitution lip service, and obeying the rule of law in which it outlines. Today, much of the Constitution and its restrictions on government action has either been convoluted or simply ignored. Our nation's looming financial and economic problems directly stem from a long, yet simple failure to obey the Constitution. Our national debt continues to soar, the Federal Reserve continues to print fiat paper money, and we continue to engage in undeclared wars around the globe. It is not just the federal government that is bankrupt--but it is the ideas which led us to this place in our history which are truly bankrupt. And our state in West Virginia is following this path as well.

So what does it mean to "obey the Constitution"? First and foremost, the Constitution was written explicitly to restrict the powers of the federal government. The individuals who wrote and adopted it knew that power in government tends to concentrate, and once this power becomes more and more centralized, freedoms in every facet of life would ultimately deteriorate. In essence, if the power to act is not enumerated in the constitution, then the federal government has no authority to pursue such actions. After all, if the Constitution means nothing, if it means that the federal government can do whatever it wants, then why have a Constitution to begin with? Of course, the Constitution can be amended, and it has been several times. This is the appropriate way to act--because it forces transparency on the federal government and the actions in which it takes. But today, we do not even bother with amending the Constitution. We just ignore it, or use it to get votes when it perhaps can get votes on a "pet" issue from time to time.

So what can we in West Virginia do about this Constitutional Crisis? And here, the Founders gave us a tool in their constitutional arsenal to deal with unauthorized acts by the federal government--the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

The Founders of our country felt so strongly about limiting the scope of the central government that they purposely included two critical amendments within the Bill of Rights to explicitly outline their opinion. In fact, many of the founders would not advocate a Constitution without the inclusion of these amendments. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution read:

9th Amendment:

"The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

10th Amendment:

"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."

If the federal government oversteps its authority, it is up to the states, not the Supreme Court, to nullify such unconstitutional acts. After all, the Supreme Court IS the federal government. How can any institution with ultimate power be trusted to interpret the extent of its very own power? We can no longer trust Washington D.C. to obey the Constitution. Separation of powers aside, all branches of the federal government have willfully ignored the document for so long, that it has lost its meaning in Washington. We must act here in West Virginia to not only set precedent for future generations, but to speak directly to Washington that the federal government is violating the highest law in our land, that of Constitutional law.

Nullification is the right of the States to declare illegal laws passed in Washington, not authorized under the Constitution, to be "null and void". In essence, any law not authorized by the Constitution is no law at all. Since state representatives are closer to the people, the hope was that they would become more responsive to these necessary actions--and that the state governments would interpose themselves between the people and the federal government's unconstitutional intrusions.

But we are failing to lead on this in Charleston, and there are reasons for this. The largest reason why one does not see states resisting unconstitutional measures is because the federal government has realized it can "bribe" the states themselves with federal handouts. The federal government simply prints money, and hands it back to state politicians, who are all too eager to use this money to get re-elected themselves. So rather than "call-out" the federal government for its inappropriate actions, state politicians merely go along with them, as long as the federal government prints up more money and spends it in their districts.

Now, there are a number of issues in which nullification can be utilized appropriately. For example, the EPA is not authorized under the Constitution (for this agency to be legal, the Constitution would have to be amended to grant the power to the federal government). If anything, this is a state power, not a federal power. In addition, there is no authorization in the Constitution for the federal government to regulate education, energy, or establish a central bank (the Federal Reserve). The states must regain their proper roles as the final arbiters of constitutional law. If this does not happen, then the growing financial problems in Washington will likely escalate.

When the Constitution is ignored, or not properly amended, as it has been for decades, then it becomes easier and easier for centralized government to act like it does not exist at all. Obeying the Constitution requires vigilance, and sometimes a willingness by elected leaders to make unpopular decisions. To preserve this document for our posterity, and its meaning, we must think in the long term, and not think about what is personally expedient to achieve personal benefits or that of re-election.

Source