MONTANA’S COMPACT; USA MODELS ITSELF ON AUSTRIA-HUNGARY
Most of you who are regular readers of this site are aware that one of the things we've been following here is the rise, within the last few years, of a widespread movement in the states of the USSA (and in one or two instances, the provinces in Canada) to push back on the overreach and outright bad policy of their federal governments. In the USSA this has now reached wide proportions, as a variety of actions are being contemplated, or actually passed, in state legislatures, and this week I'm planning to talk about some of them in our blogs, because judging from the amount of emails this past two weeks from all of you, these types of stories are at the top of your lists of things to watch.
This "pushback" movement has grown to encompass state initiatives for bullion depositories, county initiatives in various states to secede from that state and form a new state (in the new California movement) or to join another state (the Greater Idaho movement), or to just plain secede altogether from the federal union (Texas), to movements or state initiatives to recognize specie and bullion as legal tender (several states), or even to accept it in payment of taxes (Wyoming), or state nullification laws and bills to pre-empt potential federal gun grabs (Missouri), and as we'll see later this week, now including moves from some states "allowing" their state treasurers to buy bullion for the state treasury (translation: "You'd better buy bullion for the state treasury".)
Watching this movement not only unfold, but broaden its concerns from merely starting state bullion depositories to other areas has been fascinating, and for me, a sign that many people in this country and to a lesser extent in Canada are recognizing that their federal systems are almost irretrievably broken and unfixable through normal political channels. In the last quarterly wrap with Catherine Austin Fitts, I also mentioned that the next thing to watch for would be these states proposing regional mechanisms of pushback and arbitration.
Well, you can check that one off in the "successful prediction" column, because now the state of Montana has proposed exactly that(this article shared by W.G. with our thanks):
Now other states have proposed similar commissions for review of federal regulations, bills, and executive orders, but only within their individual states. What Montana is proposing is actually a kind of permanent compact of states to agree among them to do so:
A bill introduced in the Montana Senate would create a “Constitution Settlement Commission of the States” by state compact to review, evaluate, and define the scope and power of the federal government. This would set the stage for states to take further action to refuse to cooperate with overreaching federal power.
Sen. Theresa Manzella (R) introduced Senate Bill 434 (SB434) on Feb. 20. The legislation would establish the Constitution Settlement Commission of the States through an interstate compact among participating states. Every state that adopted the compact would send a delegate to the commission. The commission would become active with a minimum of nine states adopting the interstate compact and appointing delegates to the commission.
“The purpose of the commission is to provide a mechanism for a consensus decision from the states concerning what powers the states have granted to the government of the United States in the United States constitution. The purpose is not to overthrow or supplant the government of the United States, but to define its scope, purpose, and power.”
It's quite important to understand the significance of this development, for the clear intention of the bill is not simply to allow states to push back, but to create a mechanism whereby the strength of states is combined in order to do so. If Orange Man Bad or alleged president Bai Den Jo were, for example, to mandate that everyone be quackcinated against the outrages of thelatestdressedupfluvirusfromchinasitis, a commission of nine or ten states nullifying such a proposal would be much more of an "attention getter" than just one or two states acting on their own:
As Marbut explains, the success of the commission would ultimately depend on individual states taking action upon the commission’s recommendation.
“The success of the entire effort will depend, ultimately, on the dedication of the states to use their state sovereignty reserved to them under the Tenth Amendment to resist federal excesses in unison. Whether or not sufficient states will demonstrate enough gumption for that remains to be seen. However, there currently is a wave of states’ resistance to federal power, even if a patchwork effort, suggesting the states may have the necessary gumption. If such resistance were in unison among many states, for specific issues, the chances of a successful outcome would be greater, thus the Commission concept.”
It is when one views such moves in the context of other moves - particularly the moves now in several states to recognize bullion and specie as legal tender, and to establish their own state bullion depositories - that a clear message is emerging: that the federal government in Swampington DC (or Rottawa) is becoming increasingly irrelevant, as its currencies are declining in value and trustworthiness, and as their policies are increasingly insane.
Forming a compact of states, is, from this point of view, a step - and I would argue, a significant step - in creating an entirely new, and parallel, federal government, and a part of me suspects that this, whether intended or not, will be the ultimate result. It's a sure sign that the old monarchy and imperial arrangement just isn't working, and that it's time for Austria and Hungary to go their separate but equal ways, merely agreeing to maintain a common foreign policy and military (which performed so well against Russia [cough hack wheeze])....
It will be interesting to watch and see if in fact Montana does pass this bill and it gets signed into law, and to see whether other states will make proposals to modify the compact or join it. I suspect they will. And then the real question will be who gets to play the role of Prime Minister Istvan Tisza in the twilight days of the Empire and head the commission, for make no mistake, that will be almost as important an office as anyone playing the role of the Kaiser in Swampington... (By the way, speaking of Austria-Hungary, has anyone else noticed the strong resemblance of Victoria Nuland's hubris, over-confidence, and arrogance, to Konrad von Hoetzendorff?)
See you on the flip side...
No Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
Hey Doc,
I am extremely surprised that with all of this State push back, that you are not talking about the Convention of States movement!
I think they are at least half way there now!
Chris
and, what if the proposed Montana law resulted in the formation of a compact which made a determination that a particular Federal law was unconstitutional and then another compact of states determined that the same law was constitutional.
in Nebraska and Oklahoma v. Colorado, the SCT refused to hear the challenge to Colorado’s legalization of marijuana under original jurisdiction but said that the plaintiff states could sue in a lower federal court.
quote from https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/12/oklahoma-and-nebraska-sue-colorado-a-hypocritical-lawsuit-could-undermine-states-rights.html
— “But when another state decides to experiment with a new drug policy, Bruning and Pruitt’s support for state sovereignty dries up. They are arguing that Congress’s prohibition against marijuana should force every state to prohibit it as well. (These attorneys general aren’t opposed to all intoxicants. Their position on marijuana might have something to do with the fact that both Bruning and Pruitt have received significant campaign contributions from alcohol industries.)
This strange little lawsuit against Colorado is so astonishingly hypocritical, so brazenly antipodal to Bruning and Pruitt’s professed philosophy, that even admirers of both men are aghast. Case Western Law’s Jonathan H. Adler, the mastermind behind the latest Obamacare suit, noted with disgust that “it is as if their arguments about federalism and state autonomy were not arguments of principle but rather an opportunistic effort to challenge federal policies they don’t like on other grounds.” Georgetown Law’s Randy Barnett, who brought the first Obamacare suit from the fringe to the mainstream, wrote that “I see no other way to interpret Nebraska and Oklahoma’s lawsuits than as an example of ‘fair weather federalism.’ ”
Justice Thomas dissented arguing that there was original jurisdiction and the federal law (Controlled Substances Act) protected the States.
“The plaintiff States have alleged significant harms to their sovereign interests caused by another State.”
https://casetext.com/case/nebrasks-v-colorado
Having heard about the uber wealthy and powerful hanging out in Montana, making weather ballons? , and knowing a bit about Wyoming and Jackson Hole and all that…well well. I’m not sure their consortium of states …uhmm, yeah. I’m a curmudgeon. I got a bit too close to Lyndon Johnson once at sixteen; and Mr. Rogers, a walking corpse, going into the Portsmouth library one day; and a couple of years later, the nuclear regulatory commission. I even spent two or more months in Wyoming once. Each of these memories makes me nauseous.
I wish they’d all get on a space ship or something and go back to where they came from. Think I’ll watch “Caveman” with Ringo Starr. Or more JOhn Cleese.
It could be argued that the US “Empire” has grown, evolved and transitioned from a national to a global Empire over the past 23 years since 9/11. Indeed, Washington leads NATO, and now this week has consumated AUKUS – watch our UK Prime Minister with your President and Australia’s Prime Minister meeting in San Diego and forging a naval pact against perceived “global threats” China and Russia. Also Washington leads the Five Eyes intelligence alliance group of nations – US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64948535
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56284453
Make no mistake, the US alliance (Empire) with the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand is all seeing, all world encompassing and military power dominance. The next step by Washington of its Empire will be to expand it into Space, the Moon and Mars.
The shadow masters intend to bring all the horrors of Western European tribal warfare to the USA SOMEONE LIKE BALKINIZING BIG STATES around the World. And what about that song Where Have All the Flowers Gone when will they ever learn?
Something like this had become inevitable, and I’ll bet dollars to donuts there’s much more like it to come. By now, Harpers Ferry 2.0 and the Rubicon are fading in the rearview mirror.
I can’t even imagine what kind of clown-and-fireworks show and neofascist moves we’re in for in 2024 in these dis-United States. If anywhere else in the world seemed much better, I’d emigrate out of this cauldron of political insanity if I could, at least for the next few years.
This is an inevitable event and long overdue result of the reported passage of the 17th amendment, which unmoored and essentially “fired” the States from the Federal apparatus. Since the States are the party that created the Federal appartus, it is patently unconstitutional for the amendment to have withstood scrutiny and was always common sense. You cant, even with an amendment, take away the parties that are the only parties to the agreement.
We were both typing “inevitable” at the same time!