Friday, February 20, 2009

Oh Yeah, a Sternly Worded Letter Should Do the Trick


I've discovered that an axiom of the legislative session is that business gets filed and dealt with on a daily basis that is most accurately described as futile, pointless, and a misappropriation of valuable time that could be spent elsewhere.

I mean, I get it. Legislators have an agenda suggested by the Governor or by hot-button issues, and sometimes they don't get caught up in the discussion and don't get any facetime. Facetime for a politician is a substance akin water, blood, and oxygen combined. So in order to grab a headline or get their name heard by their peers, and more importantly their constituents, they file concurrent resolutions.

The people need to know their elected officials are at least trying to bring home that bacon.

These resolutions are called to honor people that have made an impact in the state, like honoring the only Cy Young winner to come out of Arkansas, Cliff Lee. That's all fine and well but let's call a spade a spade. This is nothing more than a collective statement made by the legislative body at large. The bill demanding a Thomas Paine Day? Concurrent Resolution. The bill to honor Ronald Reagan? You guessed it. The bill to let people carry weaponry into church legally? Wrong! That's just a regular old bill, no matter how silly it sounds.

I'm not saying they're unimportant, because I think all of that business has its place, but this stuff is just unimportant, don't you think? Wait...did I just contradict myself in the same sentence?

Not necessarily; couldn't a majority signed memo do the same trick of honoring people? Why do we waste such valuable legislative time debating in committee, then chamber, then another committee, then another chamber to sign off on something that has little more effect than a clearing of the throat.

This lesson became even more clear while I was going over the latest concurrent resolution, HCR 1011.

This is a statement of defiance against the Federal government and its white-knuckle grip over the states. “I have … the impression that individuals in Washington feel the state is an agent to them, when in fact the federal government is an agent to Arkansas,” cosponsor Rep. John Woods, R-Springdale, said.

The other cosponsors of the bill, Republicans Reps Karen Debra Hobb of Rogers and Roy Ragland of Marshall say they feel the same way; like the state is the lapdog of the Federal government, having no sovereignty of its own, and on the beckon call of the Washingtonites.

Reading this bill sent me on a bit of a rolercoaster of feelings and thoughts regarding the matter. A quick review of the path:

First Reaction

Really? There's nothing else you could be doing with your time? There's, what, two weeks left to file bills in this legislative session and this is how you're spending those valuable hours? By pushing statement bills? Way to really take up for your constituents.

The agenda mainly consisted of animal cruelty, the cigarette tax, the lottery and the grocery tax; There's nothing else you could be doing in the meantime? There isn't one bill for your district that you could propose to aid them directly? Nothing?

Maybe this is speaking against the futility of resolutions in the first place. And I hate to sound like I'm bashing the legislative process, and I certainly think the legislative body should be able to speak collectively on important issues. Sending the Federal government a Post-It reminding them of the tenth amendment is not one of these issues that needs to be taking up the valuable time of the legislators.

I'm sure the Feds understand the checks and balances against their indomitable take over. It's the Tenth Amendment, for Pete's sake. Where's Mark Martin when you need him to bellow out "IT'S THE LAW!" with that trademark primal shout of his?

Second Reaction

But wait a minute; these guys have a point, and it seems to be a pretty popular one at that.

Fellow blogger and local heartthrob Jason Tolbert
went into greater detail about the resolution and linked to other sources who are all jacked up about the issue. Tolbert says that according to Woods, the last straw to give the go ahead to file the resolution was this whole nationalizing of the banks, an idea that offends ardent conservatives and even gives many moderates the willies. Many economists — including Mr. Free Market Alan Greenspan — are saying that it's the only solution to get us out of this economic pickle.

And I admit, reading this resolution, I find myself getting equally enthralled with the language of the bill. It's really got everything a freedom-loving individual loves:

"...Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory process of the states..."

"Whereas, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment..."

and last but certainly not least, "Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more..."
The resolution puts the ever-spreading government in its rightful place to stick up for themselves.

The Feds have been on a spreading spree like it's Manifest Destiny since the Bush Era, and Obama hasn't shown any sign of pushing the breaks anytime soon.

I spoke to Marion Berry, a Blue Dog conservative Democrat, about the amount of emergency spending and spreading the government was undertaking by adopting this stimulus bill. Berry admitted that the new administration was putting into place some actions that offended some of his more conservative sensibilities, but "if there's ever been a time to do such a thing, now is the time."

That may be, but the time ought not be to tread on the states like a Federal Big Brother. Obama recently met with several mayors to make sure everyone was on the same page with regard to a grassroots approach to applying the stimulus dollars. There's even an office set up to monitor the transparency of the spending of the moolah.

Vero quis custodiet ipsos custodies? No?

So while the new boss is admitting and attempting to regulate the regulation, the Tenth Amendment was set in place to regulate the regulators, to watch the watchmen. Hear, hear to these band of legislators sticking up for Arkansans with the resolution.

Third (Final) Response

Really? There's nothing else you could be doing with your time? There's, what, two weeks left to file bills in this legislative session and this is how you're spending those valuable hours? By pushing statement bills?

Doesn't that look a lot like my initial response? Me too. That's because it was.

My main problem is the ineffectiveness of it all. "Hey! We're mad! What are we gonna do about it? Write a sternly-worded letter. That'll show em!"

Since when have we been pro-state? It was the late 1800s , best I can recollect. That whole Civil War thing? A large facet was over the rights of state having precedent over the rights of the federal government. It was the one of the first of many victories for the Feds.

So these legislators are doing a lot of saber rattling over the rapid spread of the government and are taking steps to make sure that the Feds know they're none too keen on the idea.

But who cares? What does it amount to other than blowing around hot, albeit principled, air. It just seems like a lot of frivolity.

But there's a lot to be said for the frivolous.

1 comment:

  1. But the events that took place in the mid-1800s may be repeated, friend.

    ReplyDelete