Playing the Long Game
12/06/12 • 13 min
When talking with people about executing a state-based strategy to devolve power away from the federal government, I often run into immediate and vigorous protests.
“Our state legislators are spineless. They will never pass any of your legislation.”
“The state will never risk its federal funding. We can’t stand up to the feds.”
“The party establishments are too entrenched; we can’t get anything done at the state level.”
These, and many other barriers, do indeed stand in the way of effectively utilizing nullification at the state level. But most people take too short of a view and get discouraged. They focus on what cannot be done today and miss the bigger picture – what we can do today to set the stage for what we will do tomorrow.
We have a long war ahead of us, and we won’t win it through one decisive battle or a quickly executed short-game.
The tide in the Pacific during World War II turned in favor of the Allies after the Battle of Coral Sea and the Battle of Midway. But the United States still faced a determined Japanese military entrenched across a vast expanse of the Pacific. After its costly victory in the Battle of Midway, the American Pacific command didn’t try to win the war by immediately attacking Japan or its Pacific strongholds, but instead executed an island hopping strategy that bypassed the most heavily fortified Japanese positions. The leapfrogging strategy focused Allied resources on less strongly defended positions that could support a further drive toward the Japanese mainland. The strategy effectively cut off Japanese strongholds like Rabaul, leaving them to “wither on the vine.”
Operation Cartwheel kicked off in the summer of 1943, but the Allies weren’t in a position to actually invade Japan until the fall of Okinawa in June of 1945.
The U.S. and Allied forces used a long-range strategy executed over a two-year period to win the War in the Pacific.
It will take an equally long-range strategy to rein in an out of control federal government.
Americans tend to want instant results. But the U.S. didn’t reach this point in just a few presidential administrations. It took more than 75 years of usurpation to amass $16 trillion in debt, and strip virtually all power and authority away from the states and the people.
State nullification may well be our last hope. But we simply can’t expect every state to immediately stand up and begin pushing back against the federal government.
Some states do currently have a climate conducive to nullification efforts on certain issues. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center indicate at least 10 states will seek to nullify the detention provisions written into the National Defense Authorization Act. Currently, at least 17 states will refuse to implement state-run health insurance exchanges under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and several states will push legislation to more aggressively block implementation of the national health care program. Eighteen states have legalized medical marijuana, and at least seven other states will consider bills to create medicinal cannabis programs in the upcoming legislative season.
But many state legislatures won’t consider any kind move that could potentially upset the apple cart. They can’t afford to. For example, my home state of Kentucky receives more than $1.50 in federal funding for every dollar collected in federal taxes. We are a welfare state, and Kentucky lawmakers know it.
So, should people in states like Kentucky simply give up and live with the fact that bureaucrats in D.C. will run their lives forevermore?
Of course not!
Like Allied forces in the Pacific during WWII, folks in these states will have to play a long-game, focusing on winning small victories, consolidating positions, then moving on to the next battle.
Start by networking various groups in the state and educating others in the principles of nullification, founding history and state sovereignty.
This can begin to change the general climate in the state and make it more favorable for future activism. Most Americans don’t know what nullification is, much less its rich history. This has to change before we can expect our lawmakers to actively push nullifying legislation.
Target specific unfriendly representatives and senators, and actively campaign to remove them from office.
You say your lawmakers simply won’t consider nullification or state sovereignty related legislation? Your governor kowtows to the feds?
Then replace them.
Support a governor who will stand up for the sovereignty of the state. Start a PAC and raise money for nullification friendly candidates. Again considering Kentucky as an example – a huge number of representatives won new terms without...
When talking with people about executing a state-based strategy to devolve power away from the federal government, I often run into immediate and vigorous protests.
“Our state legislators are spineless. They will never pass any of your legislation.”
“The state will never risk its federal funding. We can’t stand up to the feds.”
“The party establishments are too entrenched; we can’t get anything done at the state level.”
These, and many other barriers, do indeed stand in the way of effectively utilizing nullification at the state level. But most people take too short of a view and get discouraged. They focus on what cannot be done today and miss the bigger picture – what we can do today to set the stage for what we will do tomorrow.
We have a long war ahead of us, and we won’t win it through one decisive battle or a quickly executed short-game.
The tide in the Pacific during World War II turned in favor of the Allies after the Battle of Coral Sea and the Battle of Midway. But the United States still faced a determined Japanese military entrenched across a vast expanse of the Pacific. After its costly victory in the Battle of Midway, the American Pacific command didn’t try to win the war by immediately attacking Japan or its Pacific strongholds, but instead executed an island hopping strategy that bypassed the most heavily fortified Japanese positions. The leapfrogging strategy focused Allied resources on less strongly defended positions that could support a further drive toward the Japanese mainland. The strategy effectively cut off Japanese strongholds like Rabaul, leaving them to “wither on the vine.”
Operation Cartwheel kicked off in the summer of 1943, but the Allies weren’t in a position to actually invade Japan until the fall of Okinawa in June of 1945.
The U.S. and Allied forces used a long-range strategy executed over a two-year period to win the War in the Pacific.
It will take an equally long-range strategy to rein in an out of control federal government.
Americans tend to want instant results. But the U.S. didn’t reach this point in just a few presidential administrations. It took more than 75 years of usurpation to amass $16 trillion in debt, and strip virtually all power and authority away from the states and the people.
State nullification may well be our last hope. But we simply can’t expect every state to immediately stand up and begin pushing back against the federal government.
Some states do currently have a climate conducive to nullification efforts on certain issues. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center indicate at least 10 states will seek to nullify the detention provisions written into the National Defense Authorization Act. Currently, at least 17 states will refuse to implement state-run health insurance exchanges under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and several states will push legislation to more aggressively block implementation of the national health care program. Eighteen states have legalized medical marijuana, and at least seven other states will consider bills to create medicinal cannabis programs in the upcoming legislative season.
But many state legislatures won’t consider any kind move that could potentially upset the apple cart. They can’t afford to. For example, my home state of Kentucky receives more than $1.50 in federal funding for every dollar collected in federal taxes. We are a welfare state, and Kentucky lawmakers know it.
So, should people in states like Kentucky simply give up and live with the fact that bureaucrats in D.C. will run their lives forevermore?
Of course not!
Like Allied forces in the Pacific during WWII, folks in these states will have to play a long-game, focusing on winning small victories, consolidating positions, then moving on to the next battle.
Start by networking various groups in the state and educating others in the principles of nullification, founding history and state sovereignty.
This can begin to change the general climate in the state and make it more favorable for future activism. Most Americans don’t know what nullification is, much less its rich history. This has to change before we can expect our lawmakers to actively push nullifying legislation.
Target specific unfriendly representatives and senators, and actively campaign to remove them from office.
You say your lawmakers simply won’t consider nullification or state sovereignty related legislation? Your governor kowtows to the feds?
Then replace them.
Support a governor who will stand up for the sovereignty of the state. Start a PAC and raise money for nullification friendly candidates. Again considering Kentucky as an example – a huge number of representatives won new terms without...
Previous Episode
Ignorance, Fear and Hypocrisy: Tools of the Opposition
Sometimes people lash out at us Tenthers because they’re scared. They have some preconceived notion of the kinds of things we support, or oppose. Others are just ignorant. They feel that devolving power outside of DC means that the things they love cannot be done. It’s the feds or bust! That’s their view. And still others who attack people as being Tenthers do so because they’re just good old-fashioned hypocrites. They hate Constitutional limits sometimes and gladly praise them at other times.
In all these cases, people are using the word “Tenther” as a slur, of sorts. If that’s the case, I say bring on the attacks!
But, I digress.
SCARED
The most prominent example of someone who’s scared is Rachel Maddow. Ok, well...she’s probably not frightened herself and is likely just a fear monger, but her M.O. is to play off the fear of others who are. In this case, people like Rachel like to conflate support for limiting federal power with racism, support of slavery, and other nefarious causes.
America has a horrible history with hatred based on race. From the slaughter of countless indigenous Indians, to slavery, discrimination against Irish, Jews and others – this country has not been a shining example of love, peace and freedom over the years. And add to that the fact that some prominent people in favor of racial segregation in the mid-20th century used the Tenther tool of Nullification to back up their views – and you’ve got a recipe for some legitimate fear.
I won’t get into all the little details right here. But, to be clear, American Indians weren’t killed in large numbers due to federalism. Nullification wasn’t used by people to defend slavery. It was used by abolitionists. And those who advocated for these principles to defend the morally reprehensible practice of segregation were not only an anomaly, they were just plain wrong.
IGNORANT
Then we have the ignorant types who think that being a Tenther is bad because it would eliminate some favorite program of theirs. There’s certainly some fear at play in this group as well, but I think it’s primarily because they’re simply misinformed.
Most of the times, these folks will cite a list of programs that would be ended under our so-called “radical” view of the 10th Amendment. They then end it there as if the only way to run virtually any program that helps people is through the good graces of the politicians in Washington DC.
Never will you hear them saying things like, “These Tenthers want to eliminate social security. While I think it’s better to have this done by the Federal government, those who are in favor of this as a government program shouldn’t worry as much as some tell you to – because under the Tenther view, such programs could be carried out by the states.”
No, they never say that. They also never seem to even think that the market could do a better job than the government at whatever program they’re worried about losing, but, that’s a different conversation altogether.
Either way, they’re either blind or ignorant to the fact that someone or something else could possibly do what they want done.
HYPOCRITES
Finally, we have the fakes. These are the people that rail on Tenthers as evil, or scary, or dangerous to the status quo on the one hand, but use the same talking points on the other.
Nan Aron is one of these. She’s the founder and president of Alliance for Justice, “a national association of over 100 organizations, representing a broad array of groups committed to progressive values and the creation of an equitable, just, and free society.”
In general, these are not bad goals at all (depending on how they’re accomplished, of course!)
But in the Huffington Post yesterday, Aron wrote an alarmist piece about Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito talking, tongue-in-cheek, about the 10th Amendment. Here’s what Alito had to say in a recent speech:
“It is hard not to notice that Congress’ powers are limited. And you will see there is an amendment that comes right after the First Amendment, and there’s another that comes after the Ninth Amendment. Those are just a couple of examples.”
Not a thumping level of support for the 10th, but at least the guy acknowledged it. But this one line set Aron on fire. Her article seems to be intended to serve as a warning to people that Alito is a) a Tenther and b) this is something every good person should fear.
The idea that Alito is a strict constitutionalist Tenther...
Next Episode
4 Steps You Can Take to Stop Obamacare Now
Obamacare can still be stopped.
And no, it’s not going to be stopped by Pelosi and Boehner – or Roberts and Scalia. It’s going to be stopped by people like you – pressing your state to resist. In fact, Obamacare’s ability to become reality in the long term is like a house of cards. The act is not viable economically and unstable politically. The only way it can gain a foothold at this point is through compliance in the states. Resistance will kill it.
In fact, there are 4 ways that you can resist Obamacare on a state level. Here’s a quick overview of each:
1. Reject the Exchanges. States were “given an option” – run the exchange, partner with the feds on running it, or leave it to DC to figure out. It doesn’t matter what “cards we were dealt” – as some governors are saying. Running an unconstitutional program for the feds is just plain wrong. And the first – and easiest – thing for states to do is to just say no.
Shifting the burden for health insurance exchanges to the feds effectively sabotages the implementation of Obamacare.
The federal government needs states to be complicit to pull this off. Otherwise, these decisions on who was creating exchange wouldn’t even have been included in the first place. The fact of the matter is that DC doesn’t have the resources or the manpower to run these exchanges in every state. Some analysts are saying that they only have the capacity to do so in 30 states, and any more than that will lead towards a collapse of the system.
Right now? Contact your governor and urge him or her to reject the creation of an exchange. Or, get your state representative to introduce a bill banning it. You can even use this bill in states where Governors have made the wrong choice. Make a state exchange illegal with a veto-proof majority and you’ve just made your DC-loving governor irrelevant. You can find model legislation online at tenthamendmentcenter.com/banexchanges
Also, share this short video on the issue from the Goldwater Institute:
2. Reject the Medicaid Expansion. During the Obamacare case before the Supreme Court, Rob Natelson and his colleagues at the Independence Institute argued that the law’s provisions forcing the states to expand Medicaid were unconstitutional. Neither the Constitution nor case law, they pointed out, permits the federal government to use federal spending programs to coerce the states. Seven of the nine justices agreed with them, essentially adopting the arguments advanced in their brief.
As a result, the states may consider freely whether or not to accept additional federal funds for the Medicaid expansion. Accepting federal funds might seem to bring the states short-term fiscal benefits. But the fiscal risks of doing so are very great—perhaps eventual bankruptcy. Financial and practical matters aside, helping the federal government run an unconstitutional program by participating in it on a state level is just plain wrong.
Get model legislation for your state HERE.
3. Pass a Health Freedom Act or Amendment. Already passed in more than a dozen states – three of which were in November, well-after the Supreme Court ruled on the Constitutionality of Obamacare, the Health Freedom Act is a powerful step towards the nullification of Obamacare. It is introduced as either standard legislation or as a proposal to your state’s constitution, often requiring a vote of the people.
It often includes language such as this: “An act banning the imposition of any penalty, tax, fee or fine on those who do not purchase health insurance.”
According to Michael Cannon of the CATO Institute, in order to operate an exchange, state employees would have to determine eligibility for ObamaCare’s “premium assistance tax credits.” Those tax credits trigger penalties against employers (under the employer mandate) and residents (under the individual mandate). In addition, state employees would have to determine whether employers’ health benefits are “affordable.” A negative determination results in fines against the employer. These are key functions of an exchange.
Thus, if the state establishes an exchange, then that law would violate state law by indirectly compelling employers and individual residents to participate in a health care system. That sort of law is precisely what the Health Care Freedom Act exists to prevent.
But it’s not just exchanges. This would prevents the adoption of any health care policies that are inconsistent with the Health Care Freedom Act. Under Obamacare, that will likely be many. Get more information at
If you like this episode you’ll love
Episode Comments
Generate a badge
Get a badge for your website that links back to this episode
<a href="https://goodpods.com/podcasts/tenth-amendment-center-constitutional-conversation-84845/playing-the-long-game-4542896"> <img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/goodpods-images-bucket/badges/generic-badge-1.svg" alt="listen to playing the long game on goodpods" style="width: 225px" /> </a>
Copy