Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm quite frankly sick to death of the federal government overstepping the limits set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
Things like the EPA, federal gun laws, federal drug laws, etc. Maybe some people in Washington need to do some studying of the 10th Amendment.
Anyhow, what's your take on states' rights and on the federal government's repeated willingess to overstep its boundaries?
Nobody cares... So I'm not sure if the problem is with Washington, or the citizens..
Why would it be surprising to see that nobody cares when their being paid or the "betterment of the government" is an argument used. After all, who wouldnt give up their rights for the benefit of the government, to think like that is self centered..
Now SHUT UP and give up all your money and freedom, and of course, be happy to do so.
Nobody cares... So I'm not sure if the problem is with Washington, or the citizens..
Why would it be surprising to see that nobody cares when their being paid or the "betterment of the government" is an argument used. After all, who wouldnt give up their rights for the benefit of the government, to think like that is self centered..
Now SHUT UP and give up all your money and freedom, and of course, be happy to do so.
That Constitution Party is sure looking a hell of a lot better.
I wonder why so many citizens AND officials consider that minor, little document something that can simply be ignored.
Anyhow, what's your take on states' rights and on the federal government's repeated willingess to overstep its boundaries?
If you look at the 10th Amendment, it places the federal government in a small, confined compartment. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The 10th Amendment is a prohibitory rule of law which recognized States' jurisdiction in certain areas. The States therefore, have the right to act, or not to act, as they see fit, in the areas reserved to them. If they have duties that correspond to these rights, then they are owed to the citizens of their respective State.
If people are unhappy with their State's health care program, then they can bring pressure on their state officials, and if that fails, then they could elect a new set of officials. Who knows better than than the people of Massachusetts what kind of education their children need, or Floridians of want kind of nursing programs they need, or New Mexicans what kind of welfare services to offer. Instead of states answering to a federal government, the states answer to the people. This allows people to be sovereign, not an omnipotent federal government, which when it accumulates too much power will create a government remote from the people and relatively immune from popular constraint.
Local problems are best dealt with by the people most directly concerned.
Last edited by I Like Taxes; 04-21-2009 at 10:47 AM..
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok
I'm quite frankly sick to death of the federal government overstepping the limits set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
Things like the EPA, federal gun laws, federal drug laws, etc. Maybe some people in Washington need to do some studying of the 10th Amendment.
Anyhow, what's your take on states' rights and on the federal government's repeated willingess to overstep its boundaries?
States don't have "rights". People have rights. I support a very strong central government myself. Some things should be left to states but anything that has an effect on any other state- even remotely- should be regulated by the Federal government. And this includes education.
When the Constitution was written, the Framers lived in a much different world than we live in. There was no internet, no jets, no interstate highways, no TV, no radio and people rarely travelled more than a short distance from where they lived. Therefore things in one state generally did not affect those in other states. People who went to school in one state tended to stay in that state for life. Now people move and travel all over the country and even the world. If you are poorly educated in Illinois and move to Minnesota and end up in prison or on welfare there, the education system in Illinois has affected taxpayers in Minnesota. That is why we need more and more centralized government.
I'm quite frankly sick to death of the federal government overstepping the limits set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
Things like the EPA, federal gun laws, federal drug laws, etc. Maybe some people in Washington need to do some studying of the 10th Amendment.
Anyhow, what's your take on states' rights and on the federal government's repeated willingess to overstep its boundaries?
If the states think their rights are being trampled upon, they can petition to the Supreme Court so stop acting like there is no redress... even if you don't agree with the interpretations of the Supreme Court.
Secondly, there are two ways the feds regulate state behavior. The first way is that Congress has the ability to regulate interstate commerce. Where the activity has a substantial impact on interstate commerce, it falls under the purview of Congress. You recall that Biden tried to pass a federal domestic violence law -- it was invalidated by the Supreme Court because there was not enough of a nexus between domestic violence and interstate commerce. The second way is through the power of the purse. A good example of that would be seat belt laws or legal drinking ages. There is not enough of an impact on interstate commerce to give jurisdiction to the Congress to make laws concerning those issues. So, what did they do? They conditioned federal monies on the passage of certain laws within the state. If the state wants the money, it will pass the law; if not, it can stay as-is and forego the money. The states, by and large, have decided to go with the federal requirements on these issues but some states do not. Georgia, for example, has passed a law that says pickup truck drivers don't have to wear seatbelts. The federal government consequently deprives the state of millions of dollars in highway assistance. The fine folks of the GA legislature think that's just grand.
So, that is the state of the law. The federal government is not doing anything that it's not entitled to do under the Constitution. If folks want to change the Constitution to enumerate the things that can be regulated by the federal goverment, then go at it! But still know that the federal goverment has other tools at its disposal.
I'm quite frankly sick to death of the federal government overstepping the limits set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
Welcome to genuine conservatism.
The govt has been doing that since the Civil war. It started then, pretty much, but exploded during the Great Depression, and has been going on more and more ever since. Now we are seeing yet another explosion with the election of the 2006 Congress and the 2008 President, who are taking advantage of the (liberal-created) mortgage crisis to enact even more unconstitutional programs.
BTW, conservatism isn't just a blind adherence to a piece of paper. It's adherence to the idea of a government limited to certain functions - things that privatre people and groups cannot do (national defense, foreign relations, criminal prosecution, and some others). The Constitution just happens to conform closely to that agenda, and so conservatives could do a lot worse than to hold it up as an "ideal".
For this reason, liberals (in both parties) either pay it lipservice, or ignore it completely, while happily violating it daily.
It is not to be ignored but it has to be viewed as a "living document" that changes as the needs of the country change.
In order for it to be considered a "living document" amendments to the constitution need to be added. Until that happens, its not living, its solid, unchanged..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
