Let's remember why one might want to use the federal government to solve problems: only the federal government had the power to reduce racial discrimination in the former confederate states. Only the federal government has the power to address interstate pollution - air and water in particular. I suspect (but don't know how to source) that the majority of our economy involves interstate commerce, with food, building supplies, energy, telecommunications, consumer goods and medical supplies crossing state lines more often than not, and thus the economy is best addressed at a federal level.
There is, of course, a balance to be struck between local and national competency, and government at all levels can improve at serving the poor and the ignorant, but replacing federal power with "state's rights" is a sorry direction to go - painful as the alternative may be.
The issue is not state or local vs. federal but subsidiary, conducting government at the lowest practical level. Constantly linking the devolution issue to segregation is like banning someone from driving because their father died while DUI.
Civil rights, disasters, environmental... Fed, have at it. Everything else, get out of the way. Commerce clause has gone well too far. I support Heart of Atlanta Motel, but in no effing way would I ever support Wickard v. Filburn and others which use excuses to implement tyranny based out of DC
There's are fascinating writings under the title "The Anti-Federalist Papers". Most who didn't sleep through high school have heard of the Federalist Papers. That was the Pro side of the argument over the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist Papers are the argument about why this Constitution was a very bad idea.
The people who had just thrown off one powerful central government weren't real keen on starting another one. And boy were they right.
You can talk to your county commissioner. If you don't go with a big check, you'll never speak with your congressperson these days. Lobbyists love the strong federal government because they have to bribe fewer people.
4 comments:
Let's remember why one might want to use the federal government to solve problems: only the federal government had the power to reduce racial discrimination in the former confederate states. Only the federal government has the power to address interstate pollution - air and water in particular. I suspect (but don't know how to source) that the majority of our economy involves interstate commerce, with food, building supplies, energy, telecommunications, consumer goods and medical supplies crossing state lines more often than not, and thus the economy is best addressed at a federal level.
There is, of course, a balance to be struck between local and national competency, and government at all levels can improve at serving the poor and the ignorant, but replacing federal power with "state's rights" is a sorry direction to go - painful as the alternative may be.
The issue is not state or local vs. federal but subsidiary, conducting government at the lowest practical level. Constantly linking the devolution issue to segregation is like banning someone from driving because their father died while DUI.
Civil rights, disasters, environmental... Fed, have at it. Everything else, get out of the way. Commerce clause has gone well too far. I support Heart of Atlanta Motel, but in no effing way would I ever support Wickard v. Filburn and others which use excuses to implement tyranny based out of DC
There's are fascinating writings under the title "The Anti-Federalist Papers". Most who didn't sleep through high school have heard of the Federalist Papers. That was the Pro side of the argument over the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist Papers are the argument about why this Constitution was a very bad idea.
The people who had just thrown off one powerful central government weren't real keen on starting another one. And boy were they right.
You can talk to your county commissioner. If you don't go with a big check, you'll never speak with your congressperson these days. Lobbyists love the strong federal government because they have to bribe fewer people.
Post a Comment