Arizona House panel OKs bill to secede from union : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Arizona House panel OKs bill to secede from union

Would kick in if U.S. declared martial law or confiscated guns

By Robbie Sherwood
The Arizona Republic
Feb. 4, 2000

So far, the bulk of the nation has ignored conspiracy theorist Joseph Stumph's warnings about the Trilateral Commission and its plan to subjugate the United States to a one-world government.

But in Arizona, he's found a willing audience.

Bolstered by Stumph's testimony, Rep. Karen Johnson's measure to dissolve the federal government and set up sovereign states passed, 3-2, Thursday in the Federal Mandates and States Rights Committee. The bill, HCR 2034, says that Arizona's secession would be triggered if the federal government instituted martial law or attempted to confiscate guns, and would require that at least 34 other states go along.

"We're proposing that if things get as bad as they could get, that these states won't allow the federal government to put us into a one-world government," said Stumph, who is pushing a similar proposal in his home state of Utah. "I don't expect we'll get 35 states to sign on. The American people are not educated enough on this yet."

Stumph, an author of three out-of-print books about the Constitution, said several shadow groups of "mostly businessmen and industrialists" are pushing for a one-world government.

Johnson, a Mesa Republican, said the bill, which would have to be approved by voters in November, is an "insurance policy" against a federal government that might turn tyrannical.

Rep. Bill Brotherton, D-Phoenix, called the debate a "total waste of time."

"Obviously . . . one of the more important issues we have is mental health in this state," Brotherton said. "I wonder if we are going to have a bill on the grassy knoll next to decide who shot Kennedy."

Copyright 2000, Arizona Central

-- Possible Impact (, February 04, 2000


Hey Zguy,
Take a look at the format here, it's somewhat different from my "usual style".(grin)

-- Possible Impact (, February 04, 2000.


I LIKE IT.......(the format AND the article). Wyoming would sign on!

-- Will continue (, February 04, 2000.

hmmmm, just like in the movie "2nd Civil War". It was 'zona that used Guard against Fed troops.

-- Dan G (, February 04, 2000.

I like the idea of states being able to secede. As a "religous right extremist," I've seen a lot of my freedom to raise my kids the way I want eroded, and I'd like to be able to go somewhere that would give me the freedom without the federal government meddling. But my understanding is that the question of whether states can be able to secede is what the Civil War was fought over, and the can't-secede people won.

-- Markus Archus (, February 04, 2000.

Wouldn't it be cool in McCain won and Arizona seceded because of his policies?

-- Lyre Liar (, February 04, 2000.

Most definetly interesting.

Hmmmmm. McCain is a US Senator from Arizona and as I recall a Y2K aware but quiet on the subject recently.

Please continue with updates as this bill evolves thru Arizona legilature.

-- Bill P (, February 04, 2000.

Very interesting. Thanks PI.

-- Hokie (, February 04, 2000.

The Bill.....

REFERENCE TITLE: abolish federal government; state sovereignty

State of Arizona House of Representatives Forty-fourth Legislature Second Regular Session 2000

HCR 2034 Introduced by Representatives Johnson, Cooley ----------------------------------------------



Whereas, on July 4, 1776, our founding fathers proclaimed that the people had the right to alter or abolish their government and declared thirteen British colonies to be free and independent, or sovereign, states; and

Whereas, on March 1, 1781, the thirteen states formed a central government they called the United States of America under a charter known as the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, which stated that "each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence"; and

Whereas, on September 17, 1787, the leaders of the Continental Congress signed the present Constitution of the United States, which was then transmitted to the thirteen states for ratification and the formation of a new central government; and

Whereas, several of the states delayed ratification of the Constitution and three states made clear their position regarding sovereignty by stating that "the powers of government may be resumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness"; and

Whereas, eventually all thirteen of the independent states ratified the Constitution of the United States and joined the new Union, while retaining their sovereignty as states. The states made the new central government sovereign only to the extent that the states delegated to it limited and specific powers; and

Whereas, the Constitution of the United States is merely a treaty among sovereigns, and under treaty law when one party violates the treaty the other parties are automatically released from further adherence to it unless they wish to continue; and

Whereas, the fifty current principals, or signatories, to the treaty have done well in honoring and obeying it, yet the federal agent has, for decades, violated it in both word and spirit. The many violations of the Constitution of the United States by the federal government include disposing of federal property without the approval of Congress, usurping jurisdiction from the states in such matters as abortion and firearms rights and seeking control of public lands within state borders; and

Whereas, under Article V, Constitution of the United States, three- fourths of the states may abolish the federal government. In the alternative, if the states choose to exercise their inherent right as sovereigns, fewer than thirty-eight states may lawfully choose to ignore Article V, Constitution of the United States, and establish a new federal government for themselves by following the precedent established by Article VII, Constitution of the United States, in which nine of the existing thirteen states dissolved the existing Union under the Articles of Confederation and automatically superceded the Articles.


Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring:

1. That when or if the President of the United States, the Congress of the United States or any other federal agent or agency declares the Constitution of the United States to be suspended or abolished, if the President or any other federal entity attempts to institute martial law or its equivalent without an official declaration in one or more of the states without the consent of that state or if any federal order attempts to make it unlawful for individual Americans to own firearms or to confiscate firearms, the State of Arizona, when joined by thirty-four of the other fifty states, declares as follows: that the states resume all state powers delegated by the Constitution of the United States and assume total sovereignty; that the states re- ratify and re-establish the present Constitution of the United States as the charter for the formation of a new federal government, to be followed by the election of a new Congress and President and the reorganization of a new judiciary, similarly following the precedent and procedures of the founding fathers; that individual members of the military return to their respective states and report to the Governor until a new President is elected; that each state assume a negotiated, prorated share of the national debt; that all land within the borders of a state belongs to the state until sold or ceded to the central government by the state's Legislature and Governor; and that once thirty-five states have agreed to form a new government, each of the remaining fifteen be permitted to join the new confederation on application.

2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this Resolution to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.


-- mush (, February 04, 2000.

Rep. Bill Brotherton, D-Phoenix, called the debate a "total waste of time."

"Obviously . . . one of the more important issues we have is mental health in this state," Brotherton said.

Gee, almost verbatum out the "the manual"

-- mush (, February 04, 2000.

While the loss of AZ might be a welcome thought, I thing that S. Carolina tried this at one time. As I recall, it didn't work out to well for them. Of course I could be remembering incorrectly. It was before I was born.

Best wishes,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (, February 04, 2000.

Yahoo! to forward thinkers. Always helps to have an exit. How hard would this be if events warranted it? So much spin and speculation, the issue would be corrupt before a vote could be taken. I like it.

-- margie mason (, February 04, 2000.

The question of whether a state has a right to secede from the United States of America was definitively answered in 1865 and the answer is NO. It'll remain NO all the way until a state or group of states manages the put forth the various kinds of force it will take to make the answer YES. Until then, this is all so much rhetorical masturbation.

We, as individuals and as states, only have those rights we can enforce. If you have no means of backing it up, or getting some other larger more powerful group to back it up for you, then you do not have that right.

This may not be what many of us would consider to be moral, or just, or fair but it is the way it is in this world. THAT was the lesson learned in 1865.


The Prudent Food Storage FAQ, v3.5

-- A.T. Hagan (, February 04, 2000.

Santa Barbara County should sign on. In the event of a national emergency they're already planned to be sovereign anyways

-- spamnoid (, February 05, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ