by Robert M. Traxler
The television newsmagazine 60 minutes did a report Oct. 7 on a Missouri law that tells local and state law enforcement officers not to enforce some federal gun laws. It even forbids local and state police to cooperates with the ATF in some cases.
The good folks at 60 minutes were apoplectic that Missouri does not enforce federal law. Well, folks, this column predicted this years ago, warning the anti-American Constitution, progressive/socialist left that if a state could refuse to enforce federal immigration laws, it could just as easily refuse to enforce federal gun laws. Indeed, a few other states, all strong Republican states, now have laws that limit local and state support for federal gun laws.
The American left needs to think over the impact of truly dumb state laws that set a precedent for the nation. If California can be a sanctuary state, along with 10 others (all Democratic strong holds by the way), states that refuse to enforce federal law, even cooperation with immigration enforcement agencies, other states can refuse to enforce other federal laws.
I am positive that a moral equivalence will be shouted by the left that laws regulating guns are different and not a valid comparison. Well, the argument can be made that if you can scoff at one law you do not approve of, a different group can do the same with laws they do not as well. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Once you establish a wanton disregard for one federal law, you open the door for disregarding any federal law a state feels is improper.
Years ago, I wrote in this column that the states that scoff at federal immigration laws and drug laws open the door for others to disregard any federal law they do not like. “Beware of what you wish, for as you may get it” was the warning. It is interesting that 60 Minutes did not mention the states that make it illegal to enforce immigration laws or drug laws, indeed a crime, to cooperate with federal immigration and drug enforcement agencies, but condemned them for scoffing at federal firearms laws.
Oregon has made possession of “user amounts” of heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), methamphetamine, oxycodone, and other hard drugs a misdemeanor similar to a traffic violation, carrying a whopping $100 fine. Oregon may require a person to receive an evaluation, and if necessary, counseling, paid for by the state. I could not find an Oregon law forbidding law enforcement from cooperating with the DEA or other federal drug laws, but that may exist or not be very far off.
Just how the most intelligent folks in the world, the socialist/progressive left, did not consider the future impact of their actions is puzzling. Federal law enforcement agencies have worked closely with local and state law enforcement for hundreds of years, and a safer community has been the result. Liberals and conservatives alike suffer from state, county and local laws that make it a criminal or a firing offense (to include loss of medical care and pensions) to assist federal law enforcement.
My opinion.
The nation has swung violently to the extreme left; people are sick and tired of the Democrats in the radical left leaving the center and rational thinking behind. The enormous spending bills President Joe Biden and the far left have proposed are a good example. They go way too far left, and the left needs to embrace common sense and move back to the center, or the midterm elections will cost them as it did during President Clinton’s and President Obama’s first terms; the progressives need to read history.
There is no “center” in the Democrat Party, there hasn’t been since John Kennedy. They are now Marxist nuts.
But people who vote “D” are die-hard ignorant or just plain stupid, probably more in the latter category.
Once confronted with questions of importance regarding the economy or government, they can’t respond or start the mantra of tax the rich, you’re racist, you’re a Fascist, when they support the real Fascist party. They encourage rioting, defunding police, looting, burning buildings and killing.
Mr. Don’t Tread On Me,
Thanks for the comment. We are indeed polarized with the few in the center being the difference nationally, most in the center are center right. The mid-terms will be a national poll on how far left or right the center wants to go.
Thanks again.
Thanks for your column, Mr. Traxler.
It’s my understanding that the issues of states vs. federal rights, separation of powers, and conflicting state and federal laws actually date all the way back to the original Articles of Confederation, to our U.S. Constitution, and to the subsequent Amendments. The Civil War could be added to the more recent conflict examples listed in your column. Finding the right balance between state sovereignty versus ceding all authority to a centralized national government surely confounded the Founders, and it challenges us to this day.
At the end of your column, you mention proposed “enormous spending bills” that “go way too far left.” However, in 2019, a study by the World Economic Forum in Switzerland ranked the U.S. only 12th in transportation infrastructure, and 23rd for water and electric utility infrastructure, compared to other nations around the world. The American Society of Civil Engineers has given the United States’ infrastructure overall a poor “C-” grade for 2021!
I fear that the longer our nation puts off investments in its infrastructure, the more damage we’ll suffer to our national productivity, and to our associated ability to compete globally. The eventual costs of those investments will surely continue to rise, and the opportunity costs of not making those direct investments sooner than later will cost us all in many other ways. I believe this is (or should be) a bipartisan issue, and it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts/opinions regarding what specific “common sense” changes you’d like to see in those “enormous spending” bills. Thanks again!
Mr. Bergeron,
Sir,
555 billion for climate change, 400 billion for schools, 200 billion for child tax credits, 165 billion for healthcare, 150 billion for housing, all may be a good thing to do however they have little to do with infrastructure. The numbers are from Time Magazine hardly a conservative news agency.
The infrastructure Bill has 57% going to infrastructure per Time Magazine a very high estimate but let’s use it what we could do is cut the non-infrastructure items out of the infrastructure Bill, what a concept!
Thanks for the comment.
All good points Mr. Traxler, thanks for the reply and clarification.
Mr. Bergeron,
I agree wholeheartedly, our “infrastructure” needs funding. About 40% of the “infastructure” bill is for those areas bullocks. The remainder of the bill is bullhockey.
However, your knowledge of American history is lacking in that in original thought and culture once free from Great Britain the local and state governments funded everything within their jurisdiction. They formed their own local, county and state governments without support or help by the weak federal government. The only power the fed had was forming armies, militias and a navy for the defense of citizens and their properties. All politics were local, not extending beyond state boundaries. The federal government was weak and the founders intended it to be so.
If Congress would be totally honest – read and understand what is in a bill. These bills are so large with thousands upon thousands of pages with BS addendums and specialized pork carve outs for powerful politicians. Each item should be voted upon, instead of a huge bill nobody reads.
It will cause more inflation, no doubt about it.
I would like to know when was the last time a republican introduced a piece of legislation specifically designed to help the average American working family? …… Skoal
Whan was the last time Democrats let Americans keep more of their hard earned wages instead piling on more taxes and regulations? They care more for illegals than citizens.
I thought this was AB column, but thanks for not answering the question, like usual.
The rule of law has surely taken a beating of late.
One of the worst examples I have seen lately has been the refusal of individuals to honor subpoenas to appear before Congressional committees and put themselves in contempt of court.
As much as the author of the article believes that the left has swung too far to the left, so I believe the right has swung equally as radically right.
Ma and Pop used to say that the radical elements existed to make the middle look more palatable to the masses. I would certainly like to see the wishes of that silent middle of the road become the norm. We need that so badly.
Ms. Mandaville,
Thanks for the comment, hope you are well.
The party in power normally swings into radical areas, currently it is the left, next election it may be the right. I agree failing to appear after being subpoenaed is an outrage however it is not new, President Obama’s Attorney General refused two, the rule of law must be followed in a civilized society, regardless of who it is.
Thanks for the comment.
Mr. Traxler,
No doubt about what you say. Right or left, anyone who is subpoenaed must honor that requirement. Susan McDougal served 18 months in jail for her part in failing to speak against the Clintons, but I don’t remember Obama’s Attorney General doing any time, and he should have. It’s my hope we put these current scofflaws’ feet to the fire as was done to Susan McDougal.
Thanks for asking after me. I’m well, just wrapped up in a morass of issues and some writer’s block.
My best to you.
Susan MacDougal kept her mouth shut or she would have disappeared for good. Many in the Clinton circle did.
Susan’s husband knew plenty as did Susan, but he told her to shut up as he knew you don’t implicate the Clinton’s in anything if you treasured your life.
Bill and Hillary were known around Arkansas of taking care of obstacles to their ambitions. It isn’t a secret in Arkansas or in Washington.