"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
~ Lord Acton
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
~ Abraham Lincoln
In this installment I will broadly cover some of the major steps in our history that lead to the loss of Federalism. I have struggled to find the proper balance for this installment. The transition from Federalism to Statism in the United States has not been abrupt, as in revolution or coup, but it has been more incremental...with a few big bumps in the road. Through out our history, the federal government's power and control has grown...slower at times and faster at other times...but always growing, regardless of the party in power. There is a lot of detail and in-depth study required to truly appreciate this transformation. There is more detail than can possibly be covered in this format, but I will try to hit the high...or low points.
LOST:
From the founding of our republic there have been those who warned of the dangers of too much centralized power...and those who sought to wield such a power. Power can be a corrupting force, affecting even those who start out with the most noble of intentions. Power seeks to enlarge itself, like a snow ball rolling down hill. It must be tended with great care and always kept in check, if liberty is to survive.
In ratification documents for the Constitution, in subsequent resolutions and court rulings, the States had continuously asserted their sovereignty in the early decades of our country. It was commonly understood that it was the States who formed the Federal government and that the States gave to that body a very "few and defined" set of powers. All other powers were reserved to themselves, and to the people. It was also understood that the States stood as an important check on the power of the Federal body.
"Whenever our national legislature is led to overleap the prescribed bounds of their constitutional powers, on the State Legislatures, in great emergencies, devolves the arduous task - it is their right - it becomes their duty to interpose their protecting shield between the right and liberty of the people, and the assumed power of the General Government." ~ Governor Johnathan Trumbull of Connecticut (1809).The States demanded that the Federal government stay within it's defined limits of power and saw it as their duty to judge when those limits were exceeded. The accepted remedies available to the States were to "interpose" between the Federal government and the people of the State, in effect nullifying the unconstitutional laws, and, as a last resort, to secede from the Union. Nullification, the act of a State government judging a federal law unconstitutional and deeming it void and unenforceable within their borders, was used from the beginning of the Union until the Civil War. This practice was widely considered the right and duty of State legislatures to provide a check against the power of the centralized, general (federal) government.
One of the best known early examples of nullification was the reaction against the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. The Sedition Act was of particular concern. This act provided for fines and incarceration of any person who "shall write, print, utter, or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered, or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering, or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either House of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with the intent to defame the said government..." This was a blatant violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution, but congressional Federalist party supporters appealed to the "general welfare" and "necessary and proper" clauses of the Constitution. In response, Thomas Jefferson, who was at the time Vice President, and James Madison helped to draft the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. The principles laid out in these resolutions were used for many years after to justify nullification of unconstitutional laws and acts of the Federal government. These principles along with other supporting documents and resolutions came to be collectively referred to as the "Spirit of '98."
"[T]his Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the Federal Government, as resulting from the compact, to which the States are parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact as no further valid than they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the States who are parties thereto, have the right, and are duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them." ~ The Virginia Resolution of 1798
Nullification was used by Northern and Southern States at various times. It was used by Federalists and Republicans. It was even used against Thomas Jefferson's embargo of American ships traveling to foreign ports during the Napoleonic Wars. Jefferson meant this embargo to be a punishment against the French and British who captured American ships and goods during their war to keep them from getting to their opposition. It had no effect on the two antagonists, but devastated New England's maritime economy. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island all produced resolutions condemning the embargo as unconstitutional and unenforceable, thus nullifying it. Even Jefferson, the greatest champion of limited government, was not totally immune to the lure of power.
In 1832 South Carolina voted to nullify the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 as unconstitutional. President Andrew Jackson condemned the nullification and eventually sought and received a Force Bill from Congress that authorized the use of Federal troops against South Carolina if they did not comply with the tariffs. This would have been an unprecedented violation of South Carolina's sovereignty, had it played out. This became known as "the Nullification Crisis."
The popular myth is that at the threat of force, South Carolina backed down and recognized the authority of the Federal government. The truth is, as Dr. Thomas E. Woods, Jr. writes in his book Nullification, "An ultimate collision was averted when a compromise was reached whereby the tariff would gradually be lowered over the next ten years. For good measure, South Carolina nullified the Force Bill" (emphasis added). Even though South Carolina did not acquiesce to the federal threats, a critical change in historical precedent took place when Congress passed the Force Bill, authorizing the president to use the military to force the Federal will upon one of the States.
Then, in what is generally seen as the final death of States' rights and sovereignty, President Lincoln declared war against the States of the southern confederacy. Most people believe the war was all about slavery, but there is ample evidence that the slavery issue came into the picture late, and only as a political maneuver. But regardless of the real causes, it is widely held, by supporters and detractors alike, that Abraham Lincoln was a dictator who trampled the Constitution under his feet. Supporters just believe that he was a "good dictator" and use various "the ends justify the means" arguments to support his actions.
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause." ~ Abraham Lincoln
The "Union" had never been seen as indissoluble. In fact, many of the Founding Fathers and early statesmen came to the defense of the right of secession. Everyone saw it as highly undesirable and as a remedy of last resort, but our country had, after all, come into being through secession from Great Britain. States had threatened secession in the past, but never had the Federal government consider marching troops against them to force their continued membership in the Union. President Lincoln, however, felt none of the restraints of the past. Thomas J. DiLorenzo summarizes the extent of Lincoln's constitutional transgressions in his book, The Real Lincoln.
"Even though the large majority of Americans, North and South, believed in the right of secession as of 1861, upon taking office Lincoln implemented a series of unconstitutional acts, including launching an invasion of the South without consulting Congress, as required by the Constitution; declaring martial law; blockading the Southern ports; suspending the writ of habeas corpus for the duration of his administration; imprisoning without trial thousands of Northern citizens; arresting and imprisoning newspaper publishers who were critical of him; censoring all telegraph communications; nationalizing the railroads; creating several new states without the consent of the citizens of those states; ordering federal troops to interfere with elections in the North by intimidating Democratic voters; deporting a member of Congress, Clement L Vallandingham of Ohio, for criticizing the administration's income tax proposal at the Democratic Party rally; confiscating private property; confiscating firearms in violation of the Second Amendment; and effectively gutting the Ninth and Tenth amendments to the Constitution, among other things."Nationalist history looks kindly, even in awe at Abraham Lincoln. But ask yourself, if the names were changed and the circumstances brought up to date a little, would anyone, Right or Left, approve of such blatant disregard of the Constitution and usurpation of power in a modern president? Lincoln had acted unconstitutionally, killing approximately 300,000 of his countrymen, to beat the once sovereign States of the South into submission. Federal supremacy was now firmly established.
The next major step in the death of Federalism came in 1913. It was in this year that three major political and legislative events took place. Foremost among them was the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment of the Constitution. With this one short Amendment, the States lost their direct representation in Congress. This year the Federal income tax was also enacted, under very questionable circumstances, giving the Federal government unprecedented power to tax individuals and led to the massive coercive tax code and abusive enforcement agency, the Internal Revenue Service. And last, but not least, the formation of the Federal Reserve which allowed the government to control and manipulate the money supply in ways they had never dared to dream of before. These actions in 1913 snuffed all but the faintest remains of life from the Federalist system.
These are just a few of the major steps in the process in which the major principles of our founding have been undermined and and nearly completely lost. There are endless causes and examples of the Federal government's overreaching it's bounds...The emergence of the Progressive Party...Woodrow Wilson's propaganda, censorship, goon squad enforcers and incarceration of dissidents...FDR's New Deal take over of the economy...L.B.J's redistribution Great Society programs and more. All geared toward the same thing, the centralization and consolidation of power in the hands of a few, ruling-class politicians.
Over the years the States have, through threats, force and bribery, relinquished their duties and ceded their power to the Federal government, becoming mere administrative appendages of the central power. And today we have a Congress and President who are so drunk on power, so convinced of their own superiority that they no longer even attempt to provide justifications for their illegal usurpations. They simply laugh at, arrogantly dismiss or impugn the character of anyone who dares to question their actions. They do not care that a large majority of citizens are opposed to their laws, they force them through Congress before anyone even has a chance to read them. Representative government has become an anachronism...a forgotten relic of our past.
What can be done? Is there any hope? That will be the subject of the next and final installment in this series.
