The Tyranny of a King

The Tyranny of a King

The tyranny of a king. We have read this statement in history books as a paramount reason in the colonists’ move to declare independence. They were seeking freedom from a repressive leader. Today we see a covert campaign to embrace the same ideology that sparked a revolution over 200 years ago.

I am not a conspiracy theorist or one who attempts to find the underlying “angle” in someone’s position on an issue. I believe I am more of a realist tilting toward optimism.

I have always remained optimistic, hopeful, in prayerful anticipation that the church body would rise to the occasion and be the voice of the people in the public arena. I remain optimistic that our government, as an institution, is inherently good because of the foundation our fathers established. While I have seen evil at its best within the hallowed halls of government, I also see public servants taking a stand.

The latest push to derail the runaway train we call the federal government is by the declaration of state sovereignty under the 10^th Amendment. While the 10^th Amendment has been rather obscure over the years, the federal government has systematically implemented a policy of incremental centralization of powers. By centralizing power they have amassed roles traditionally relegated to the states by the Constitution. The amendment is clear in its language, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The federal government is clearly limited in their roles under the principle of “positive grant” In short the federal government can only do what is positively granted by the Constitution. It is certainly a novel thought in delegating the power to the people rather than legislating everything. Simply do nothing!

Our founding fathers had always intended on a decentralization of power through statehood with the federal government meeting specific needs of the populace. This was no more evident than when James Madison attempted to implement the “Virginia Plan” during the Constitutional ratification. Under the “Virginia Plan”, James Madison wanted to give the federal government veto power over state laws. He envisioned the empowerment of the federal government in the use of military action against the states as well as empowering the national judiciary in adjudicating cases that potentially could cause friction among the states. He went as far as to introduce a plan to eliminate the states’ traditional role in selecting members of Congress. It was quite obvious Madison’s plan was contrary to the prevailing ideology of the founding fathers and it was soundly defeated. They found their justification in the current state of affairs; that is, they had just escaped the tyranny of a king and a centralized government. How could they possibly justify recreating the same?  

The will of the people is better served through local government. As diverse as the United States has become, it stands to reason that the local government would know what is best for their constituent base. Local government has the ability to more accurately assess and meet the needs rather than seeking a one-size-fits-all solution for the people.

            As mentioned earlier, I am an optimist in prayerful anticipation the Constitution will be dignified in its interpretation of state rights. Rest assured, as the federal government continues its policy of national centralization, we will see more states demand their sovereignty. It is the only way to return the voice of government to the people. I encourage you to research your states’ participation in reclaiming state sovereignty. Visit alsministries.com and we will be maintaining the latest on this movement and give you the opportunity to get involvement.

As we embrace this paradigm shift in government, the opportunity arises to question the voting demographics of local elections and the current state of apathy towards local elections. It is a startling dilemma that demands our attention and next month we will share statistics and begin to tackle this matter of contention with the American voter.