I get these on a regular basis and I think it would benefit the greater good to not keep them to myself. It’s called “Horse Sense” and written by Wes Riddle, a local Belton, TX, conservative and member of the Central Texas Tea Party (full disclosure). But, that’s exactly what it is, “horse sense” – common sense constitutional discussions. Here’s the first of hopefully many to come:

As parties to the compact that created and empowered the U.S. Government, States have legal standing to check the federal government’s use of powers that States did not delegate. Inaction and refusal to comply with an unconstitutional federal mandate is the primary tool that States can employ. An example of this peaceful, efficient and effective resistance to federal meddling is the response to The Real ID Act 2005, which requires States to implement certain driver’s license and identification card standards and sharing of the same with other States. Most States simply have done nothing, or in fact have passed resolutions opposing it. Neither have they funded the program or implemented it. The Tenth Amendment is very important for state officials to understand because it authoritatively explains that: (1) the States and the people have kept all powers which they did not specifically delegate or specifically give up to form the Union; and (2) U.S. authority at the national federal level is limited, defined, and delegated by the States. The first point reminds us that Texas is independent and sovereign and has the wherewithal to take care of herself. The second aspect reminds us that the U.S. is not an unlimited and all powerful master but rather, a steward charged by the States with certain duties.

The original Constitution was quickly amended with the “Bill of Rights” (the first Ten Amendments) because there was considerable concern among the Founding Fathers that the original Constitution, without it, might be later misconstrued or misunderstood. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments, in particular, do not add or subtract anything in the way of powers or authority. They do, however, explain to subsequent generations what the Founders explicitly meant by the original Constitution—in military parlance, they communicate the Founders’ “intent.” The Ninth and Tenth Amendments are simply authoritative declarations which, like a monument, mark a boundary for future generations, and like a fence, keep some things on and some things off your property. If Texas is to remain sovereign and independent, Texas officeholders must wisely, peacefully, but immediately endeavor to take care of the State’s own affairs and its people and to defend the State and its people against the Federal Government’s use of “powers not delegated to the United States.”

But what happens if Texas does not preserve local self-government? What happens if the U.S. exercises “the powers not delegated” to it by the Constitution? What if Texas gives up local self-determination either voluntarily or otherwise? What if the U.S. Government overreaches into the affairs of the States and individuals? Is it of any consequence? Article 1, Section 1 of the Texas Constitution indicates that it is of grave consequence: “The maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.” ‘Houston, I’d say we have a problem!’

In fact, we’ve had a dual problem for quite some time: (1) the abdication or neglect of self-government by States; and (2) the usurpation of “the powers not delegated” by the U.S. Federal Government. Both acting in tandem make for a perfect storm, in terms of endangering our freedoms and the national Union itself. Patriots are passionate about the Tenth Amendment because it is the cornerstone of our Federal Republic. If we ignore it and fail to line up the other stones in the Constitutional edifice with it, the entire building is in jeopardy of collapsing, and this is very much the way the Founders explained their rationale for building a federal structure with dual State and Federal sovereignty in the first instance. To violate the intent and letter of the Constitution in this regard is illegal, in that it violates the Organic Law of the land. Moreover, it is risky, imprudent and foolish from the basis of history and politics, which the Founders understood extremely well. But this does not need to happen!

If your neighbor begins to build a greenhouse on your property, the neighborly thing to do, is to go talk to your neighbor and point out the problem, i.e., that he has crossed the property line and is on your property. If necessary, you may need to uncover boundary monuments and get out a survey instrument to demonstrate to your neighbor where the boundary line is and how he is encroaching upon your property. This usually solves the problem, especially if it is done in a timely manner. The first point of the illustration is that there is a dual responsibility: one must not encroach, and the other must be diligent enough to identify and defend against such encroachment. This is especially true for a federal republic made up of independent sovereign states. The second point is that vigilance and timely defense is necessary to avoid costly disputes. Even reasonable neighbors are very slow to admit and correct encroachments that are left uncontested for years. Unfortunately, the States have for a long time acquiesced to encroachments on their rights and the rights of the people—often because an unconstitutional federal action appeared to be beneficial.

If Texans are to be free and our Union preserved, then Texas officeholders must wisely, peacefully, incrementally but immediately endeavor to restore our State’s self-government, which is now impaired by the Federal Government’s use of “powers not delegated to the United States.” There are two areas where the General Government of the U.S. is presently seeking to unconstitutionally extend its authority: (1) healthcare; and (2) environmental regulation. Other areas of overreach include firearms regulation and legal tender laws. Moreover, the General Government of the U.S. has not merely usurped State and individual rights, but it has also failed to faithfully execute the immigration laws of the United States. All of which means that, as a sovereign, independent State Texas must refuse to comply with, facilitate, or enact unconstitutional federal legislation. We do not fund or budget it. We do not manage or implement it. We do not allow the Federal Government to harass or serve warrants, unless they are for Constitutional laws. This is a tall order but absolutely essential if we are to escape abject tyranny. May God turn us back to Him, and may God save Texas and keep these United States.

Wesley Allen Riddle is a retired military officer with degrees and honors from West Point and Oxford. Widely published in the academic and opinion press, he ran for U.S. Congress (TX-District 31) in the 2004 Republican Primary and is currently Chairman of the Central Texas Tea Party. Article condensed from remarks made by State Rep. Elect David Simpson to Republican Club of Austin, 7 Sep 10. Email: Wes@WesRiddle.com.

[Author's Note: The OPINIONS expressed here are solely those of the author and do not represent those of any agency of the United States Government, expressly including, but not limited to, the Department of Defense or the United States Army. This site is not designed, authorized, sanctioned, or affiliated, by or with, any agency of the United States Government, expressly including, but not limited to, the Department of Defense or the United States Army. This post is in accordance with DODD 1344.10, which expressly permits me to "express a personal opinion on political candidates and issues, but not as a representative of the Armed Forces." Therefore, I hereby declare that I do not write this post as a representative of the Armed Forces. Since I no longer own this site, consider this post also in compliance with the provisions of paragraph 4.1.1.6 of DODD 1344.10.]