On August 11, Rep. Phillip Pavlov and 44 co-sponsors introduced  the “Firearms Freedom Act.”  The bill will “make certain findings regarding intrastate commerce; to prohibit federal regulation of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition involved purely in intrastate commerce in [the State of Michigan]; to provide for certain exceptions to federal regulation; and to establish certain manufacturing requirements.”

Yup, that’s right, Michigan has jumped on the 10th Amendment bandwagon.  It’s a trail blazed by Montana and Tennesee, both of which have passed similar legeslation.  Basically, the idea is that while the federal government has the right to regulate interstate commerce, they have no right to control INTRAstate commerce.  The bottom line is, the feds would have no authority over any firearm as long as it never crosses state lines.

Michigan now joins 37 other states who have passed, or are considering, similar legislation.  If the bill succeeds, it would negate most federal firearms laws, a move the ATF is already railing against.  Last month the agency issued a statement saying laws like the ones in Montana and Tennessee don’t matter.

Tennessee judiciary chairman Mae Beavers sees things differently and fired back.

The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature.  ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.

Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders’ vision of constitutional government:

“Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter.”

“This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.”

 

 

Now, the fight will head to the courts.  It’s a battle that most people don’t even have on their radar, and one The Robalution suspects the Dems are utterly unprepared for.  If you care about your constitutional rights, support it.

For more information on how to do that, go here: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

- Robert Laurie

Yes, it’s still a long way until election day, and yes, anything can still happen.  However, it is interesting that in the last two months, Arlen Specter’s re-election prospects have grown increasingly dim.

Two months ago, in a Rasmussen poll of Pennsylvania voters, Specter led his Republican rival Pat Toomey by double digits.  The spread was 50% to 39%, giving Specter an 11 point advantage.  Today, the same poll shows Specter trailing 48% to 36% – a deficit of 12 points.  In addition, the poll shows Specter being viewed unfavorably by 54% of the voters while only 43% view him favorably.

 Most pundits are blaming the series of ugly town hall healthcare reform meetings for the decline in Specter’s numbers, but the bill itself may be the bigger problem.  According to Rasmussen’s polling 53% of Senator Specter’s constituents oppose the reform he’s been promoting.  In addition, Specter was one of only three Republicans to vote for the President’s stimulus package – a vote that was highly unpopular in his home state.

A more immediate concern for Specter?  His lead in the primaries has begun to dry up.  If it continues apace, there’s a good chance he won’t even be the Democrats nominee. 

Here at The Robalution, we hope Specter (who switched parties to avoid exactly this situation) hangs on to his health care reform position, because if these polls are any indication, the issue seems to be doing Democrats a world of good.

- Robert Laurie