Custom Search

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Choke the "Freedom to Breathe Act"

Citing the 10th Amendment, Arizona Republican Senators are introducing 'Cap and Trade Nullification' under the 
“Freedom to Breathe Act”

 In the Republican newsletter;

Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen (R) of District 5 needs your help! She and Senators Gould and Grey are the primary sponsors for Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 1050. Together, they have made Arizona the fourth state to introduce Cap and Trade nullification legislation, and this bill has “teeth”!
Known as the “Freedom to Breathe Act”, the legislation, if passed, would make it illegal for “..any governmental official to enforce within the borders of the state of Arizona federal laws or federal regulations purporting to restrict intrastate emissions of anthropogenic carbon dioxide or other greenhouse substances is herewith declared a violation of civil rights and unlawful under Arizona state law.”
In section 4 paragraph A of  Bill SCR 1050
 they claim:

 The harmless emission of anthropogenic carbon dioxide or other greenhouse substances produced by biological, mechanical or chemical processes, including refuse and agricultural operations, is a necessary incident of the Constitutional rights of Arizonans under the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as article II, sections 2 and 33, Constitution of Arizona.

The full text of the bill can be seen here:

Other organizations backing the bill are:

They seem to think it's ok to govern a womans body and mind but they don't care if we die from the air we breathe. And they do this under the guise of 'Civil Liberties'   


  1. You are totally missing the point. This isn't about greenhouse emissions. It is about our government as a constitutional republic. The point is the Federal Government doesn't have the authority to regulate intra-state commerce and activity. This has nothing to do with the Arizona government wanting us to breathe bad air. I think it was unwise to use the word "harmless" but I applaud my State for protecting my rights as outlined in the US Constitution. The US Constitution does not give the Federal Government the authority to regulate these areas. Ask yourself this question, do you support California’s attempt to create higher standards for emissions than the EPA has set? It’s the same thing, a State using its constitutional rights to protect its citizens. You cannot have it both ways: It’s ok when it works in your favor but not fair if it works against your favor.


I appreciate your comments, but please, be civil and mindful of others who may read them. Donations will not offend me :)