MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS Sixty-eighth Session February 9, 1995 The Senate Committee on Government Affairs was called to order by Chairman Ann O'Connell, at 5:40 p.m., on Thursday, February 9, 1995, in Room 4401 of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Las Vegas, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Vice Chairman Senator Dina Titus Senator Jon C. Porter COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Senator William J. Raggio (Excused) Senator William R. O'Donnell (Excused) Senator Raymond C. Shaffer (Excused) GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Senator Dean A. Rhoads Senator Maurice E. Washington Senator Bernice Martin Mathews STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Dana Bennett, Senior Research Analyst Mary Hernandez, Committee Secretary Lori Story, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Horn, Citizen Erven Nelson, Attorney Kenneth R. Ivory, Attorney Craig Jensen, Citizen Paul Judd, Engineer Patricia A. Saye, Founder, Nevada Defenders of Constitution Phil Miranda, Citizen Steven Dempsey, Citizen Dorothy Orr, Citizen Douglas Ostgard, Citizen Pat McMillan, Citizen Keith Kindren, President, Tenco Mercantile Leonard E. Stout, Citizen Brett Organ, Vice Chairman, Nevada Concerned Citizens Don Trimmer, Citizen Myron Hughes, Citizen Al Westcott, Citizen Senator O'Connell explained to all persons present that the Senate was in recess and the Senate Committee on Government Affairs could not take action on any bills. She stated the committee would listen to testimony. She explained a second hearing would be held in Carson City to receive additional testimony on this issue. Senator O'Connell explained about the teleconferencing capabilities and that Nevada was the only state with this ability. She explained during the duration of the session Room 4401 of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building would have teleconferencing capabilities. She stated all persons were invited to learn the schedule and to attend those sessions which interested them. She said if someone wanted to testify, their testimony could be heard at the committee meeting in Carson City via the teleconferencing capabilities. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION (S.J.R.) 1: Claims sovereignty of State of Nevada over all powers not enumerated and delegated to Federal Government by Constitution of the United States. Senator Rhoads presented testimony and a four page written resolution (Exhibit C) regarding S.J.R.1. Senator Rhoads said it was intended for the final bill to go before the United States Supreme Court. He explained the bill had to be written so that it would be unchallengeable in the United States Supreme Court. Senator O'Connell commented 10 states had passed resolutions similar to this bill and questioned if Senator Rhoads knew if they had used the Colorado resolution as the basis of their resolutions. She asserted she knew 24 states were considering it, but she knew of 5 states who had acted upon it. She expressed her understanding is that either the California resolution or the Colorado resolution was being used as the basis. Senator Rhoads stated the Nevada resolution has not been subject to release until this week. He said he is the first legislator to attempt this version of the resolution. Charles Horn, Constituent of Senate Assembly District 5, addressed various aspects of the resolution. He stated the movement to regain the legitimate control over sovereign destiny is not a localized issue in Nevada. He declared a resolution is not viable, it is a waste of time, it has no "teeth." He described S.J.R. 1 as a strong statement of a sovereign waking to his rightful role. He presented it was a wake up call, and the sovereigns are reassuming their lawful rights. He quoted, "The 10th Amendment movement may be America's last chance peacefully to get Congress to obey the constitution." Mr. Horn emphasized the word "peacefully," by stating it is a major idea established in our constitution. He stated that politicians have seriously underestimated the public anger and are blind to the rebellion spreading across the land. He hoped that was not true with the elected officials in Nevada, but said it was the case throughout the country, especially with federal representatives. Mr. Horn stated, "Those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are destined to repeat them." He said the message in S.J.R. 1 declared clearly that it is time for Congress to withdraw back to their limits set in the constitution. He viewed this message as a notice, declaration and demand upon an out-of-control or runaway federal government. He quoted from the Declaration of Independence, "A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them." Mr. Horn commented new guards are in place as a result of the frustration the sovereign citizens are feeling. He proposed there is something dramatically wrong with the way citizens are being governed. He asserted history will make the determination if these are the right changes. He commented: The importance of this message declares a resolve and the teeth in the resolution will be exactly proportionate to the personal resolve that each one of us feels and has with regard to this message. Through you, our elected representatives, if that resolve is indeed a paramount resolve in your heart and minds, then it will carry that resolve in your actions, in your dialogue and in your effort to cause the withdrawal of these encroachments. Mr. Horn quoted Thomas Jefferson, "I consider the foundation of the constitution as laid on this ground, the foundation of the constitution." He remarked this resolution addresses those concerns. He expounded that the founders have been turned upside down in the intent of the system they created. He quoted Thomas Jefferson again, "The states suppose that by the 10th Amendment, they had secured themselves against constructive powers." He maintained the founders were not yet aware of the slipperiness of the eels of the law. He quoted James Madison: The free men of America did not wait until usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedence. They saw all the consequences of governmental abuses in the principle and they avoided the consequences by denying the principles on which the abuses were based. Mr. Horn said Americans had forgotten those lessons of history. He stated one of the worse things Americans did was abandon the principle that we must interpret the constitution literally and in its historical context. He explained this gave ground to the expanded field about which Thomas Jefferson spoke. He defined the constitution as a contract between the people and their government. He concluded for it to be interpreted without regard to its historical intent is in effect to abolish the constitution. He explained the constitution was written with the language understandable to all, and still is today, if people took the time and effort to read it. He contended the constitution today means whatever five political appointees on the supreme court say it is. He asserted that judges interpret, legislate, seize and administer. He quoted Alexander Hamilton, "There is no position which depends on clearer principles than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void." He asserted this was an attitude Americans did not seem to embrace, but that it is a reality of legitimacy. He declared if Americans would learn the act of legitimacy, Americans would more carefully guard their liberties. He continued by quoting Alexander Hamilton again: No legislative act contrary to the constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than its principle; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; and that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but do what they forbid. He then quoted Thomas Jefferson, "Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. For powers are assumed that are not delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy." He asked how a nullification of the act occurred. He stressed it had to happen first with the citizens. They had to want that nullification. He professed if they were subdued by the dole from the public treasury, then their determination in that regard may be watered down. He insisted the next area of impact to nullify those unauthoritative actions must happen with the elected representatives. He elucidated they must be committed to resisting with all of their force and power, the encroachments of unauthorized acts. Mr. Horn declared the resolution of S.J.R. 1 contains the teeth of that message in its original form. He read lines 6 through 10 of the resolution: Resolved that this resolution serves as a notice and demand to the federal government as the agent of the State of Nevada to cease and desist immediately the enactment and enforcement of mandates which are beyond the scope of the enumerated powers delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution of the United States. He explained this statement of resolve is missing in the proposed amendment to S.J.R. 1 as well as many of the other points that have been stated there. He commented the proposed amendment adds some meritorious language that he remarked he would not oppose being included in the original, or vice versa, to include marrying the two together. He stated he is concerned with item I of the proposed amendment. He is concerned that it will significantly alter the system of government, but proposed solutions are a dramatic move in concentrating power at the executive level in the states. He said "I am truly opposed to item number 1, paragraph 1 in this new proposal. I would appreciate even more at the appropriate time, passing the original resolution as proposed, incorporating if you desire, the language of the proposed amendment, excluding item I." Senator Porter asked Mr. Horn to provide a copy of his written quotations (Exhibit D). He asked if Mr. Horn was opposed to section I on page 4. Mr. Horn replied "That is correct." Mr. Erven Nelson, Attorney at Law, testified he had lived in Nevada since 1959. He explained that since Nevadans live in a desert climate he would recite the parable of the camel and the tent: A sheik was going through the desert and he had a camel, which was carrying his belongings and of course the camel was his servant, his agent. A big windstorm started, so the sheik got off his camel and pitched his tent. It was a very small tent. He tied the camel up outside. After a few minutes the camel could not take the windstorm any more and stuck his head in the tent. The sheik said `What are you doing in here, this is my tent, you are my servant.' The camel said, `The wind is so bad outside, I can't breathe; can I just stick my nostrils in the tent for just a few minutes so I can breathe some fresh air?' The sheik said `Okay.' A few minutes later the camel asked `Can I just put my eyes in too? The wind is stinging my eyes. The wind is terrible.' The sheik says `All right.' The next thing was `My ears are filling with sand, can I just put my ears in also and there will be nothing else. The sheik says `Okay' and scoots over into the corner of the tent. Well, you know how the story proceeds, the camel ends up inside the tent and the sheik was outside. Mr. Nelson outlined this is what has happened to government in the United States when people discuss federal versus state and local community separation of powers and federalism. He expounded citizens have come far afield of what the founding fathers intended and how the constitution was written. He asked for everyone to keep the parable of the camel in mind as he covered various points in his testimony. He mentioned one of the greatest sources of law is in the Old Testament of the Bible. He asked the audience to recall the story of Moses, a great ruler and lawgiver. However, when it came time to administer the law, Moses had problems because there were so many people, that he was listening to disputes from morning until night. Moses delegated his power to efficient local government rather than central government. Mr. Nelson stated these two themes, the decentralization of government and the camel and the sheik, appear in the history of United States Constitutional Law. Mr. Nelson asserted there is a revolution going on by the groundswell to put the 10th Amendment back into its proper place in government. He quoted George Washington, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master." He presented our federal government should be our servant, instead of our master, but instead, to a large extent, it has become the master, and we the servant. It is an instrument of force. He explained nothing he said was original text, he was paraphrasing from eminent writers and speakers and did not want the committee to think he was plagiarizing. He spoke of the chain of command. One should only go to county government when city government cannot handle the problem. One should only go to state when the county cannot handle it, and only to the federal government when the state cannot fix the problem. He quoted Thomas Jefferson: The way to have good and safe government is not to trust in all to one, but to divide it among the many; distributing to everyone exactly the functions he is competent to do. But the national government being entrusted with the defense of the nation and its foreign and federal relations. The state governments with the civil rights, law, police, and administration of what concerns the states generally; the counties with local concerns of the counties and each ward directing interests within itself. It is by dividing and subdividing these republics from the great national one down through all its subordinations until it is the entity of every man's farm unto itself. What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which has ever existed unto the sun is the generalizing and concentrating all cares and powers into one body. It is well to remember that the people of the states of this republic created the federal government. The federal government did not create the states. Mr. Nelson continued by quoting George Bancroft, "The people of the states demanded a federal convention to form the constitution. The constitution owes its life to the concurrent act of the people of the several states." He then quoted Abraham Lincoln: I declare that the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, especially the right of each state to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgement exclusively is essential to that balance of powers on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends. And I denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any state or territory, no matter under what pretext as the gravest of crimes. Mr. Nelson said, "The Yucca Mountain fiasco was something Abraham Lincoln would not have envisioned as the proper role of federal government, to say the people of the State of Nevada should store the nuclear waste of the people of New York or Pennsylvania." Mr. Nelson continued his testimony by quoting Thomas Jefferson: I consider the foundation of the constitution as laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited to the states are preserved to the states, or to the people. To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus is to take possession of the boundless field of power no longer susceptible of any definition. The capital and leading object of the constitution was to leave with the states all authorities which respected their own citizens only, and to transfer to the United States, those which respected citizens of foreign or other states to make us several as to ourselves, but one as to all others. He paraphrased this as the federal government should only be involved in disputes or relations between two states, or between the states and a foreign power. He stated the federal government was not rightfully involved in the things the states could police themselves. He quoted Thomas Jefferson: Our country is too large to have all of its affairs directed by a single government. The theory behind our constitution is surely the wisest and best, that the states are independent as to everything within themselves and united as to everything respecting foreign nations. Let the general government be reduced to foreign concerns only and let our affairs be disentangled from those of all other nations, except as to commerce which the merchants will manage the better the more they are left free to manage themselves. Our general government may be reduced to a very simple organization and a very inexpensive one, a few plain duties to be performed by a few plain servants. Mr. Nelson stated that in 1883 after Jefferson had the opportunity to serve as President of the United States, Jefferson said: I ask for no straining of words against the federal government, nor yet against the states. I believe the states can best govern our home concerns and the general government our foreign ones. I wish, therefore, to see maintained that wholesome distribution of powers established by the constitution for the limitation of both and never to see all offices transferred to Washington. Mr. Nelson maintains that the transfer has happened. He added that this bill, S.J.R. 1, is the first and proper step to put it back to the way it was. He quoted the Supreme Court of the United States from 1911, "Among the powers of the state not surrendered, which powers therefore remain with the state, is the power to so regulate the relative rights and duties of all in its jurisdiction as to guard the public morals, the public safety, and the public health, as well as to promote the public convenience and the common good." He stated subsequent amendments to the Constitution and radical interpretations by the supreme court almost completely obliterate the authority which the 9th and 10th Amendments were designed to preserve. He pointed out the founding fathers created a system of checks and balances so no one branch of the government obtained a concentration of power. He explained this as horizontal checks and balances and further explained there were vertical balances between the states and the federal government which is the what the 10th Amendment is addressing. He concluded S.J.R. 1 would promote this. Mr. Nelson switched topics from the founding fathers to public lands and how it affected Nevada. He stated Thomas Jefferson during his presidency was determined to keep the cost of the federal government within the available revenue from imports. President Jefferson had the prevailing excise taxes repealed, abolished the Internal Revenue System, and began selling off public lands. He was able to pay off half the enormous debt encumbered by the Revolutionary War in 8 years. Mr. Nelson related Andrew Jackson's efforts. Andrew Jackson sold off public lands until he had completely paid off the national debt and had a substantial surplus. President Jackson therefore returned $28 million to the states. Mr. Nelson emphasized he was not advocating that the states sell off public lands to pay the public debt, but he was showing how important it was to the early presidents to not have the federal government onerous to the states. Mr. Nelson's next topic was the Northwest Territory. He stated the original Articles of the Confederation were ratified in 1781. The Articles of Confederation did not last because they did not have a strong enough central government. In retrospect, the states had too much power and no common interest. However, under the original Articles of Confederation there was a provision that new states could come into the union on an equal footing with the states already there. Mr. Nelson testified there was a written provision that Canada could come into the United States and have four states. The French Canadians elected not to do so, otherwise, Canada could have been part of the United States. Mr. Nelson explained this idea of equal footing was carried over into the legislation of the United States. He continued by saying that in 1787, the same year the constitution was adopted, Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance and outlined the manner in which the affairs of the federal territories would be administered. He stated it provided for the admission of new states as follows: There shall be formed in the said territory not less than three, nor more than five states. And whenever any of the said prospective states shall have 60,000 free inhabitants therein, such state shall be admitted by its delegates into the Congress of the United States on an equal footing with the original states in all respects whatever and shall be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and state government, provided the constitutional government so forth shall be republican. Mr. Nelson explained this as eliminating a second class of states or citizens. He reiterated all the incoming states would have the same rights as the original 13 states. Mr. Nelson noted when the federal government was formed under the new constitution in 1789, the Congress reenacted the same ordinance exactly as it has been established in the Articles of Confederation. He stated the result of this was during President Jefferson's tenure of office, he purchased the Louisiana Territory from the French which gave the United States a vast territory for states to come in under equal footing. Mr. Nelson commented when Nevada became a state, the government started to change the rules. He testified the Nevada Constitution basically advocates some of the rights of the state to give up its lands in exchange for statehood. He stated this was unconstitutional. He explained this was against the Northwest Ordinance and against all of the tenents the founding fathers had discussed. He emphasized that 87 percent of Nevada's land is owned by the federal government and 99 percent is administered by the federal government. He stressed this is not how the states back east are operated. Mr. Nelson quoted Thomas Hobbs, "The obligation of the subjects to the sovereign is understood to last as long and no longer than the parallaxes by which he is able to protect them. For the right men have by nature to protect themselves when none else can protect them, can by no covenant be relinquished." He summarized this as meaning any attempts by the Territorial Government of Nevada in 1864 to exchange land for statehood are not legitimate. He read from the proclamation signed by Abraham Lincoln in 1864 which admitted Nevada to the union: Whereas the Congress of the United States passed an act which was approved on the 21st day of March, ....therefore be it known that I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in the course of the duty imposed upon me by the act of Congress do hereby declare and proclaim that the said State of Nevada is admitted into the union on an equal footing with the original states. Mr. Nelson stated that Abraham Lincoln quoted directly from the Northwest Ordinance and that is the way things should be now. Mr. Nelson urged passage of S.J.R. 1. Kenneth R. Ivory, Attorney at Law, stated he was inspired by the sense of freedom prevalent in the room. He stated the people who gathered with a commitment and purpose to protect something very dear and valuable to them were an inspiration. He commented this spirit of freedom was alive 200 years ago when our forefathers left England to throw off the oppression they were facing. They came to America to be free, not just religious freedom, but political freedom. He acknowledged they faced taxes which were oppressive, they faced invasions on their liberties, and invasions on their privacy which led to the revolution. He testified states, mindful of the tyrannies they had faced, put limits on the central government to exercise power over the states. Mr. Ivory quoted James Madison: The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal government are few and defined; those which are to remain with the states are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which in ordinary courses of affairs concern lives, liberty and properties of the people and internal order, improvement and prosperity of the state. Mr. Ivory asserted the constitution would not have been ratified without the 10th Amendment. He stated the nation is facing congressional and bureaucratic tyranny. He declared the unfunded mandates are costing local governments hundreds of billions of dollars per year. He asserted that there are many states which have passed 10th Amendment resolutions and many states which are working to pass 10th Amendment resolutions. Craig Jensen, Citizen, testified in favor of S.J.R. 1. Mr. Jensen concurred with Mr. Nelson's synopsis of government. He addressed lines 9, 10, and 11 on page 1 of the resolution. He stated it was conceivable to believe that the creator is greater than the creation. He agreed the federal government must be strong enough to perform the tasks assigned, but must be limited to the job they were intended to do. He quoted Thomas Jefferson, "Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding, and should be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything, or nothing at pleasure." Mr. Jensen proposed the problem is in the delivery of money from the federal to the state and local level empowering all the government agencies involved, taking over functions which were once left to the people or to the states themselves. Mr. Jensen stated this is the crux of the matter: money is power. He cited unfunded mandates, and worry over loss of federal grant monies and tax revenue as the evidence. He likened the dependence of governors and city mayors on federal dollars to an addict's dependence on drugs; the "fix" from the government giving a false sense of security in the same manner a drug "fix" would give an addict. He stated the public lands issue, the proposed Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Depository, unfunded mandates for Medicaid and other welfare related issues, unfunded GOALS 2000 Education legislation, the gas tax dollars being put into the general funds at federal level to offset the huge deficit instead of being put into trust to be used to maintain and build national and state highways and roads; and other fiscally irresponsible matters which drain Nevada's resources must be addressed by Nevada citizens. He asserted the intrusion of the federal government into the lives of the citizens encompasses more than federal dollars. He stated it is an encroachment upon our personal liberty, freedoms, creativity and resources. Mr. Jensen expressed the solution is not the sharing or competing with the federal government for this usurped power, rather the solution is in the throwing off of federal intervention intrusion into the personal lives of the citizens of the State of Nevada. He stated the means to this are not rebellion and anarchy, but rather in the reinstitution of the United States Constitution. He quoted S.J.R. 1, lines 9 through 11 "Whereas, the power of the states, as stated in the 10th Amendment indicates that the federal government was created by the several states specifically to act as an agent of the states." Mr. Jensen stated it must understood that the federal government is the servant of the state, not the state the servant or extension or an agent of the federal government. He expressed the direction has been reversed from the original intent and meaning of the founding fathers. He testified reassertion of rights and sovereignty through the adoption of S.J.R. 1 paves the way to recovery from the hallucinating effects of "fediction" (federal addiction). He quoted Thomas Jefferson, "Any government, domestic and foreign in little as in great things shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power. It will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venial and oppressive as the government from which we have separated." Mr. Jensen then quoted Samuel Adams: We should continue this theme: sovereign states confederated for the purpose of mutual safety and happiness, each contributing to the federal head such a part of its sovereignty as would render the government fully adequate to those purposes and no more. The people would govern themselves more easily, the laws of each state being well adapted to its own genius and circumstances and the liberties of the United States would be more secure. Mr. Jensen testified: Nevada is in the center of the political spectrum, that Nevada is caught in the age old tyranny on one hand and the anarchy on the other. Nevada is neither left nor right, but stands in the center. Nevada is law-abiding citizens that want the supreme law of the land applied in practice. We recognize the political situation as it really is, and although no government has been in the past perfect, what we seek is not a utopia but its a reasonableness of limiting the powers of government upon us. The beginning of the immediate solution is the adoption of this resolution. I hope you will vote in support of Senate Joint Resolution 1. Paul Judd, Engineer, testified in favor of S.J.R. 1 (Exhibit E). He stated: The great need during the depression of the 1930s prompted the federal government to initiate many programs and policies which the states at that time were unable to formulate. The affection of the people naturally turned to Washington because that was where the solutions were coming from. Whether or not the national government had the authority to act as they did was not at the forefront of debate at that time. The need was immediate and the programs provided the needed relief. I would suggest since that time until only recently, the public affection has remained with the government. However, due to recent far reaching encroachments of a now bolder and more ambitious federal government, we the people are looking to the states as the instrument of redress. Mr. Judd provided examples of federal government encroachment and ended his testimony with: There obviously are innumerable examples of excesses and liberties taken by the federal government at the expense of the states. The people across the nation have awakened to these encroachments and are appealing to the states for help. With the people once again at your side, it is time to reclaim these rights and restrain the federal government within the powers originally granted. Thank you. Patricia Saye, Founder, Nevada Defenders of the Constitution, presented testimony regarding S.J.R. 1 (Exhibit F) and provided a handout to the committee (Exhibit G). She stated: Many Americans have the wrong conception of what their state legislature is supposed to be. They look upon it as a sort of secondary lawmaking body which concerns itself with minor questions that are not of sufficient importance to engage the attention of Congress. The citizen should take more interest in his State Legislature. He should be more concerned about its personnel, and powers, for this body, for the greater extent than Congress determines his political privileges and his immediate relationships. It regulates his civil rights and duties, secures him in the tenure of his property, and makes most of the rules that govern his daily movements. To do these things efficiently, it is essential that the State Legislature be properly organized, truly representative, unhampered by needless constitutional restrictions, and endowed with adequate authority. Ms. Saye concluded her testimony by saying: The people of the United States are both the rightful masters of the Congress and the courts. I am in support of the 10th Amendment resolution. However, I feel it is an extreme amount of wasted time -- of your time, our time, any citizen of the United States of America -- to have to go through what we are having to do to regain our constitutional rights granted to us in our constitution and Bill of Rights. Phil Miranda, Businessman, provided examples of federal government bureaucracy. He recounted in 1979 the Nevada Legislature reaffirmed the public lands of Nevada belong to Nevada's citizens. He stated the federal government's reply to this is the enabling act, which Mr. Miranda contends President Lincoln declared unconstitutional. Mr. Miranda provided the example of the 1976 Endangered Species Act. He said Congress has asserted any state land management programs that encompass more than 100,000 acres must be sent to Congress for approval. He explained the Endangered Species Act state management plan for southern Nevada encompasses 4.2 million acres of land and has not been sent back to Congress for approval, but it is being enforced. This project is requiring hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees from Nevada citizens. Mr. Miranda explained in 1982 the Nevada Legislature affirmed the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of free state and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Mr. Miranda contended the federal government's answer to the 2nd Amendment is the Brady Bill, semi-automatic weapons ban, and hand gun controls. He described the new bill Congress is considering. He stated it will allow police to cordon off one square mile of residences, conducting house to house searches on the pretext of looking for drugs, and removal of guns from residences. He stated this is being called a crime prevention bill which is actually violating the rights of the citizens, and should not be implemented in this state. Mr. Miranda concluded his testimony by saying: This body now has the chance to take our rightful heritage to become free and sovereign again. This well meaning resolution which should have language that if the resolution be violated, that it be considered a crime in Nevada. Our sheriffs, district attorneys, and our judges be mandated through legislation to act against this treason in this state. The theory that the end justifies the means only violates more of our rights. It must be stopped here and it must be stopped now. Any laws coming out of Washington, D.C. should be approved and ratified by this honorable body before they can be implemented in our land. Steven Dempsey, Citizen, quoted Abraham Lincoln, "The people are the masters of both Congress and the Courts, not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it." He objected to giving testimony in front of a military flag instead of an American flag. He asked if Nevada was at war with some unknown enemy. He inquired if a state of national emergency had been declared which the people of Nevada knew nothing about. He declared he would rather testify in another room. He asked the committee to investigate the use of the flag in the room. He thanked Senator Rhoads for his explanation of the Sagebrush Rebellion. Mr. Dempsey reiterated that the people have always had the 10th Amendment and it was wrong to think that putting it down on paper will make it work. He insisted treason affecting people should be made a state crime. He asserted the courts had been perverted also. He said citizens should have the right to initiate prosecution of all criminals, (particularly domestic criminals, whether they are wearing black robes, whether they are in the supreme court, whether they are the district attorney and in charge, as public servants, for protecting the people). Nevadans need to be able to bring accountability for action. He proposed implementation of closed government meetings must be made a crime and the participants must be held accountable for that crime. He contended all government records must be accessible by the citizens or be considered a crime. He explained in layers of bureaucracy, the people assigned these duties perform them, but later claim no knowledge of such action. Mr. Dempsey proposed if they know nothing about these crimes being committed then they should be considered in breach of their duty and that should be a crime. He suggested this goes on because of the immunity which has been created by some "club." He said the testimony given tonight will give the committee a decision to make, although it might not be a popular decision. He paraphrased Ghandi, "When you are out in the wilderness and you sound like you are a lone voice hollering in that wilderness, take heart because you can't automatically assume since you are a lone voice that you are wrong." Mr. Dempsey concluded his testimony by quoting Samuel Adams: If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your knowledge. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains tread lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. Dorothy Orr, Citizen, testified in support of S.J.R. 1. She stated after she and her husband moved to Las Vegas, they began studying the constitution and the law. She expressed no one understands the constitution. She recounted she knew she was not taught the constitution when she was in school and she knows that it is not being taught now. She quoted Harry Atwood, Attorney at Law, Chicago, Illinois: This constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby. Anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. The judicial powers shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution. The laws of the United States and treaties made or which shall be made under their authority, to controversies which the United States shall be a party to controversies between two or more states, or between citizens of different states. Douglas Ostgard,Citizen, testified for S.J.R. 1. He stated it was up to the elected officials to uphold the duties of their office. He emphasized he could not understand how this resolution would not be supported. He expressed the citizens have given the federal government permission to do the things they are doing. He defined the Buck Act for the committee and explained its implications for federal and state government. He testified the Buck Act created different federal zones for use by governmental agencies. He restated government cannot create a state within a state, but this is what happened. He pointed out this occurred in 1940 and it changed sovereign states into federal jurisdictions. He suggested this is one of the reasons for the problems which are happening. He commented the Legislature needs to be aware they will need to stand behind this resolution once it is passed. Mr. Ostgard referred to Exhibit C. He stated many people feel power in the courts have been lost and the courts are against us. He stressed citizens have no voice in government. He paraphrased John Kennedy, "Where peaceful revolution is made impossible, violent revolution becomes inevitable." Mr. Ostgard insisted this is when the anger and frustration felt by the people emerges. He maintained an important aspect of the Legislature is to protect the rights of the people. He asserted people's rights have been trampled for ages. He stated, "Where people fear the government is tyranny, but where the government fears the people, that's liberty." Mr. Ostgard then quoted Janet Reno: A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the second coming of Christ, who frequently attends Bible studies, who has a high level of financial giving to the christian cause, who home schools his children, who has accumulated survival foods, who has a strong belief in the 2nd Amendment and who distrusts the government. Mr. Ostgard testified he did not know about anybody else, but he home schools his children. He said probably most of the christians in Alaska home school their children, and probably most of the founding fathers would fall into that category. He asked the committee not to implement new legislation but to uphold that legislation which already exists. Pat McMillan, Citizen, described the flag: I am familiar with Title 6 of the United States Code and I can tell you what that flag means and I think you should know. I realize you don't know, but what that means is you are telling all of us that we are under house arrest. That flag is flown over a fort that is under martial law. That is the only time that flag is allowed under U.S. protocol to be flown in any place other than the stern of a warship during a time of war. I know that this is not in your heart. Mr. McMillan read a written statement to the committee (Exhibit H). He continued his testimony: Most of the people who have come before this committee are patriots. They are patriots because they are standing up, sticking their heads in the line of fire when they need to preserve the rights of all of their neighbors. I can't tell you I am one of those patriots. I'm a victim. I reached this point because I have no other avenue open to me. I came to this state, this country of Nevada, 15 years ago to try and provide for myself and my family a self-sufficient existence, one where I could work and control myself. When it got to the point where I had the chance to realize that, the federal thugs came out to my lands and decided to throw me out. They threatened, if I didn't leave right away, they would spin me off the land. I don't know if you can imagine, the loneliness, the frustration, the total despair of losing your family and everything you have worked for all of your life because your state and country won't back you. I have gone to every authority I can in this state. I have gotten some help from some state authorities, I must tell you, state division of minerals and water resources have some applaudable people there and they have stood up. But with their exception, no one else has stood up. No only did they not stop the feds (federals) from assaulting me, and I mean physically assaulting me, they brought metropolitan police out because they knew they did not have the authority and had metropolitan police assault me. I've had two federal agents come up to me and admit to me in front of witnesses and on tape that they were brought out to bust my head and destroy me, but it wasn't personal. It was simply because I was resisting this takeover by the feds (federals). I have spent 2 years in intensive research trying to figure out what, when, why and I must tell you that the number of cases of the federal government via the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, and the forestry division, of harassment and assault of honest people of this country is beyond your wildest comprehension. I can spend hours telling you about those cases, but what you need to know is that everytime a court determines that they have acted improperly in telling us to cease and desist, they find a way to end run that court every single time. They have been doing this for 150 years. They have no respect for law. They have no respect for the courts. But the thing I have found out is they have no authority. Grain by grain, they have piled that sand up against our tent. Every year Congress passes 5000 or 6000 laws that have no legal authority in our state. According to the constitution, the only legal authority the Congress has to affect citizens in this state is pursuing crimes of treason, divulging defense secrets, or counterfeiting precious metal coinage or real money. They have no other authority. They have taken the authority by bluff, by the nationalist movement, but the wealthy, powerful families. I've gone to court against these feds (federals) and won every time, and now they are coming after me again. They have threatened. They are extorting me that they are going to take my claims and all of my private property and they are going to start doing this on Monday. I'm left with what alternative? To define it, you have to understand where we are. We, the people, are the government of this country. But we've lost it to these criminals, to these gangsters, to these wealthy industrialists. There's only three ways to get it back. The most desirable way would be to convince you, a majority of our senators to do the right thing. It's happening now in other states. It's a historical first. It's something I didn't expect would happen. Another alternative would be to take up arms and I must tell you there were a number of times I thought I was going to have to draw my weapon to stay alive. I've been able to avoid that and I'm still alive because of it. The third way is to go in front of a court withstanding. That means a victim, and have a court decide. Unfortunately, most people who finally get to that point go in with an attorney to represent them. It's like asking ITT, an executive at ITT, `tell us where all this goes, in your closet or buried so we can shut ITT down, oh...by the way, you're going to lose your job.' No attorney will win that, so the only way a victim can go into court is to fight that case himself. That means stopping everything else and learning the law. Running out and trying to find the support it is going to take. No one has done that yet. It is a difficult, difficult job. Senator Titus responded to Mr. McMillan's comments on the Department of Energy and the Yucca Mountain Project. She stated in the last session of the Legislature, she and Senator O'Connell had a very heated battle in the Senate over the resolution to begin to negotiate with the federal government for benefits to take Yucca Mountain. She restated this was a really heated battle and it was defeated 14 to 7 votes. She said both she and Senator O'Connell voted very strongly against the resolution. She stated "We don't want to sell our birthright, we don't want to bring the federal government in here with more control over our future, with more jurisdiction over what goes on in the state. We will still take that position again if they try to come with it next time." Mr. McMillan reiterated if the 10th Amendment is not recognized, citizens are doomed. He stated there will be chaos and civil unrest that will forever change the future of this country. He asked the senators to please do the right thing. Keith Kindren, Citizen, testified in support of S.J.R. 1. and had a handout for the committee (Exhibit I). He paraphrased Thomas Jefferson, "We have to have to have a revolution every 20 years in order to retain or keep contact with our government to keep it on track." He quoted Benjamin Franklin, "I think we have a republic, if we can keep it." He stated he had 38,000 acres of grazing rights at Mount Charleston. He testified the federal government has seized his grazing rights in an Internal Revenue Services lien. He remarked the federal government is imagining our public lands are their federal lands. He explained 80 percent of the land in Nevada could be our tax base and it would be appropriate to stop the federal government at the door. He asserted there is no negotiating with the federal government. He stated last spring the national debt was $4.5 trillion and the interest rate has recently gone up. Mr. Kindren testified he took exception to the military flag in the room. He stated he was not subservient to anyone. He explained this flag was designed to be flown by a United States Navy ship or to be flown over a conquered entity and he was not a conquered entity. Leonard Stout, Citizen, asked someone to get interested in Mr. McMillan's problems with his mining claim and to help get him some relief. Mr. Stout acknowledged he was a "cultist," referring to Janet Reno's definition. He stated he home schools his children, believes in God, has stored 2 years of food at his home, and has started purchasing guns and ammunition in the past 2 years. He commented he represents no one except for his family. He pointed out he does not have a criminal record and has never been in jail. He stated he was a professional. He said when he was eighteen, married for 2 months and going to college carrying 18 credits, he was drafted and sent to Vietnam. He declared if he was willing to die in Vietnam for his freedoms, then he was willing to die now, here, for this country. He asserted the senators are the mechanism to protect the state. Mr. Stout stated it was important to him to be able to stand before God on his judgement day and to say he stood up for his rights, his freedoms and for his posterity. He remarked we are the forefathers of what people will be talking about down the road. He reiterated he is committed to getting his freedoms back and hoped the senators could help. Brett Organ, Citizen, read a written statement to the committee (Exhibit J). He stated the dialogue between the public and its elected servants is the essence of a representative republic. He pointed out the citizens of the State of Nevada are standing on the verge of joining a growing list of states that have had enough. He testified the 10th Amendment taken in conjunction with the 9th Amendment finds that the founding fathers fully intended for the federal government to have only those powers which had been previously enumerated in our charter document. Mr Organ said: It is not my intention to recite a long list of usurpations, encroachments or just plain idiocies that various illegal federal bureaucracies have foisted upon the states and localities in the last 50 or 60 years. But I will cite just one example that is always fresh on the minds of Nevadans. Just today we learned that the Secretary of Energy has asked a house committee to pave the way for her to circumvent a 1989 law which prevents the Department of Energy from building a temporary nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain until a permanent site has been chosen. So, here again we have the heavy-handed official of a constitutionally illegitimate agency attempting to break the law in order to trample the rights of the people of the State of Nevada, as part of a process which has been one long train of abuses. Mr. Organ concluded his testimony by quoting President Dwight D. Eisenhower, "Our best protection against bigger government in Washington is better government in the states." Don Trimmer, Citizen, stated the 10th Amendment movement has barely started, but it will continue in all 50 states until every legislator of every legislature understands and believes and accepts the 10th Amendment and the constitution. He added the movement will continue until everyone believes, knows, under- stands and accepts the constitution. He stressed the federal government has no power, no authority, no money but what the states give it. He quoted Thomas Jefferson, "The government that governs best governs least." Tom Stown, Citizen, asked if the senators and congressmen were given copies of the constitution. He stated they were sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Nevada. He explained the founding fathers put in so many articles and amendments into the constitution because they had lived through tyranny and they wanted to prevent it from happening again. He asserted the rules and guidelines are not being followed. He declared the only land ever given to the federal government to control was a 10 mile square area known as Washington, D.C. and the right to control territories owned by the federal government (e.g. Guam or Puerto Rico). He said they never gave the federal government the right to come in and control 87 percent of the state land. He testified Nevada became a state in 1864, but before that it was a federal territory. He stated when Nevada wanted to become a state, the federal government set up enabling papers which guaranteed equal footing with the original 13 states with no reservations. He continued by saying right before Nevada became a state, the people of the Territory of Nevada had to turn over their claim to the unappropriated lands of Nevada to the federal government. He explained this is the reason the federal government is controlling 87 percent of the state. He stated the citizens disclaimed the land so that when we became a state, the federal government would give us back the land. He repeated once a state becomes a state, they become sovereign and control all of their land. He read article 1, section 8, paragraph 17 of the constitution. He identified this as evidence the federal government is prohibited from owning land in states. He submitted a document regarding land management for the committee (Exhibit K). Myron Hughes, Citizen, stated passing this 10th Amendment resolution would call attention to the fact that the United States is supposed to be a government of law. He said for many years everyone has sat back and let a big powerful bully tell them what they can and cannot do. He asserted the goal of everyone in the room was to pass this resolution and enforce it by peaceful means preferably, and to enforce it with force if necessary. Senator O'Connell stated: Ladies and gentlemen, I think you need to realize something. The resolution you have been speaking to for the past 4 hours is probably going to sail out of both houses. There isn't any doubt in my mind that it is going to pass. We have listened to everything you have said here tonight knowing full well that the resolution was probably going to fly out of both houses. Something you must realize is that this resolution is not going to have any teeth in it. Unless you support a bill that is going to follow this resolution (which will put the teeth into what the state will do as far as setting up the agenda for accepting or rejecting mandates), this resolution will mean nothing. Al Westcott, Citizen, requested the senators to do whatever possible to help Pat McMillan. He spoke regarding the flag in the room, "It is not a difficulty with the red, and the white and the blue, the difficulty here is with the fringe. We will no longer bow down to this surrey with the fringe on the top. It will not happen any longer. We are frustrated." He spoke of other situations which were frustrating to the citizens. Mr. Westcott stated: The federal government to Nevadans has long since been and is rapidly increasing to be a clear and present danger. In the purest context those words could mean. The Congress of the United States can authorize this nation to war based on its perception or the president's perception of `clear and present danger' and I think that is what we hear this evening. When we see the mayor of the city of Las Vegas sitting on the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), voting to spend $112,000 of our money to her own dealership in Reno to purchase vehicles for the RTC, we become frustrated. And the justification given? `I didn't read the agenda.' Responsibility is the key issue. We're willing to take responsibility are we not? We ask you to share our responsibility with us. If it is true for every single voice there are 100 people who agree but are silent, this room this evening contained 150 people times 100 means 15,000 people represented here this evening. 15,000 is enough to sway any election in this state. Either we listen to these voices or we no longer sit in positions. We are federally frustrated when we see the President of the United States and Congress commit United States forces to a multinational organization, NATO, and we give up our children, we become frustrated. Mr. Westcott spoke of his duty in Vietnam. He spoke of all wars. He said "I am an American. I am a Nevadan. But I like most people have become federally frustrated. If, as this flag says, we are `Battle Born,' I suggest that we all become born again." Senator Porter summarized some of the points he heard during the testimony. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Teri J. Spraggins, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Government Affairs February 9, 1995 Page