The federal government is out of control and has been for a while now. Finally there is a movement among the states to push back in earnest and to assert states' rights according to the principles of Thomas Jefferson. New Hampshire is among the first states in the current phase of the state sovereignty movement. That's hope and change!

(California and Texas have already declared sovereignty.)

Relevant excerpts from The New Hampshire Constitution:

[Art.] 7. [State Sovereignty.] The people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent state; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled.

[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

Here's what's going on across the country

---

2009-MAR-20:

Finally a neurosis-free perspective on the HCR6 booing:

---

2009-MAR-18: The New Hampshire Loser Alliance

---

2009-MAR-04 The big protest day
I was there grabbing video and still images. It was a decent turnout despite work hours and cold weather. The speakers were great, especially the state Reps that are on our side. Most of them tended toward the incendiary side but that was fine by me. The crowd was pumped up and chanting "NO KING OBAMA!". Then Don Gorman exhorted us to storm the State House and hunt down our Reps. The timing wasn't good, they were in caucus. They would come out at ten but I couldn't wait. There were plenty of other videographers there so I think that's covered.

I saw John Lynch walk by and called out "Mr. Lynch we want sovereignty!" He turned and said "okay". We'll see if anything comes from that.

Here's my photo album.

Here's my first video

UPDATE: I thought I'd seen Dave Ridley there:

UPDATE: Bill Alleman has video including the shameful denouement on the House floor:

At about 49:00 in the disgraceful Mike Rollo has an opportunity to explain his behavior and instead spouts more arrogant nonsense holding up the Federalists of the New Hampshire legislature in 1799 as a model for today.

At 61:00 the explosion of outrage comes from the gallery. Terie Norelli looks like she's afraid she's about to be carted off to the guillotine.

UPDATE: The Union Leader covers it.
Tom Fahey injects a tinge of anti-gun hysteria into his coverage but the open carriers were actually quite well behaved.

ARMED AND ANGRY: That gallery, which overlooks House chambers, was packed with backers of HCR 6 last week, including a few who were packing. The resolution, defeated along party lines, was a move to reaffirm the state's freedom from interference by the federal government, except in areas where the U.S. Constitution specifically gives it powers.

When the vote result was posted, HCR 6 supporters erupted in shouts and boos. Speaker of the House Terie Norelli banged her gavel and called for order. That didn't work. Rep. Dan Itse, sponsor of the measure, tried to calm upset supporters, but they ignored him.

A few scattered lobbyists began to squirm at the sight of angry people with guns, and a few knives, on their hips yelling.

State Police firmly ushered the noisy crowd out of the gallery without incident.

And Rep. Dan Eaton gets pwn3d in the comments. Despicable? Who's despicable Dan?

---

2009-FEB-23: Dan Itse on Fox - hitting the Feds on involuntary servitude.

---

2009-FEB-21: Now Arkansas

2009-FEB-14: Various updates.
A similar resolution in Montana.
One in Arizona
One from Oklahoma a while back
Washington State
Missouri

There will be a rally March 4 8:00AM in front of the State House.

Here's Dan Itse on Glenn Beck

---

2009-FEB-13: Donald McFarlane tries to get answers

I received a reply from Mr Rollo (see below). Apparently he failed to distinguish between a threat and a promise. (Although, admittely, I should probably have been a little less intemperate in the tone of my email...)

I guess we have learnt our first thing about the distinction between personal email addresses and leg.state.nh.us email addresses -- apparently the latter may be subject to blocking based on committee chairmen's request. I wonder if a FOIA request on who is on the blocked list might be instructive?

I assume that by succession he means secession, and that by Part 1 Article 8 he means Article I, Section 8 (Powers of Congress).

I can't say that I follow his argument. He appears to start off by asserting that the US constitution should properly be interpreted in the loosest possible manner so as to give Congress the broadest and most general of powers. He then seems to conclude that since this is the correct interpretation, that any actions of the US which fall even outside of this interpretation should still not be resolved against, because it is not in the state's best interest to do so.

A somewhat convoluted line of logic, to say the least. If anyone thinks I have interpreted his words unfairly, please have a crack at discerning the true meaning and let us all know!

===================================

Dear Mr Rollo,

It was not my intent to threaten anyone, and I apologize that you
perceived my email in that way.  It was my intent to communicate an
extreme frustration with the lack of any rebuttal to Representative
Baldasaro's comments in the executive session yesterday.

I do appreciate your taking the time to reply, and I am particularly
grateful that your reply provides information on your reasons for
voting as you did.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Donald

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 7:08 AM, Rollo, Michael <Mike.Rollo@leg.state.nh.us> wrote:
> Mr. McFarlane,
> First of all, please do not threaten members of my committee. If you
> continue to do so, I will request to have your emails blocked. My response
> is two fold. The first, Part 1, Article 8 of the US Constitution. Congress
> has the established power to provide for the general welfare of the people.
> The Constitution was written to be interpreted and in some cases in broad
> generalities. The second, anyone who has studied the Kentucky Resolution or
> Jeffersonian history will realize that succession of the states is certainly
> not in the best interest of the people New Hampshire. I am also aware of the
> coordinated effort nationwide on similar resolutions. Those of us that are
> from New Hampshire, are not blind followers. Just because Oklahoma or Idaho
> does something does not mean we will.
> Finally, incensed  or not, it would be in your best interest (regardless of
> which committee you testify in front of) not assume that you know or
> question the motivation of any member of a committee; Especially mine.
> Sincerely,
>
> Michael S. Rollo
> State Representative
> Strafford District 2
> Rollinsford and Somersworth
>

Donald's reply from Sarah Hutz

My reasons for the vote do align with Rep. Rollo's positions as well.

I would like you to know that while I do disagree with some of the positions stated in HCR6 - I do love this country. I support States rights, but I believe that the US Constitution was written broadly and allows some of the actions the HCR seeks to remove. I also have known many Veterans who have served this country honorably, and in some cases given their lives, and I would not seek to have our State secede from the union and nullify their sacrifice.

I made my vote based on my reading of the broad abilities given by the US Constitution and what I felt best represented the will of my constituents in Dover. I have not always been aligned against positions of your organization, but I review each bill and think of the impact on my constituents before I vote.

Rep. Sarah Hutz Dover

---

2009-FEB-12: A slap in the face.

New Hampshire House
State-Federal Relations Committee
February 12, 2009
The big Jeffersonian Blowoff

Earlier this month the public hearing for HCR6 (Jeffersonian Principles) was thronged with supporters. Not a single voice against the bill.

Now we have the Executive Session, where the bill is railroaded to ITL. A movement to ITL comes quickly from Patrick Garrity and is seconded by Dom Domingo.

Several Reps speak passionately for the bill, most notably Alfred Baldasaro and Lars Christiansen. Christiansen holds up a sheaf of emails from constituents supporting the bill. Not one Rep speaks against it or gives the slighest hint of why it should be opposed.

And yet when the vote comes, it is overwhelmingly against the bill.

Why? Why did they vote against it? And why aren't they explaining why they did so?

Something is very wrong here.

---

2009-FEB-06: (expanded FEB-8)
Dan Itse's HCR6 got its public hearing Thursday. This is the bill to tell the federal government to mind its place or else we might just secede. I'll have video later and so will Bill Alleman. I saw another camera there too.

This one via Bill McGonigle:

Bill text here

The room was jam packed, all seats taken and most standing spots too, and they kept coming. Every single name on the blue sheets I saw was for the bill. All the speakers were for the bill and the speakers kept coming.

Dan in his testimony mentioned that there are similar movements in several other states. It seems push has come to shove between the federal government and the common man.

The hearing got recessed and I couldn't stay for the continuation. It was pretty clear the way things were headed.

Tim Comerford, the new Rep from Fremont, spoke well in favor of the bill. I think he's doing quite well so far.

Bill Alleman's video is here.

The important part of the resolution:

That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and

That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.

UPDATE: More at nolanchart.com