Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibartik
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Because technically the fed shouldnt be making a lot of laws that affedc the lives of people in each state, maybe?
Meaning a lot of environmental law, some states see as totally dumb for their state, and counter productive for their particular climate/region, and many times they are right. This makes them vote against immigration law because there are 2 parties.
Same for the evangelicals.
Basically the problem is, we have a fed that is too powerful for a country, that is too diverse. Maybe?
Im just a dude.
|
Argument goes both ways. A strong federal government is a double-edged sword. It's kind of beneficial to have when "Libertarian State A" decides to start dumping unprocessed nuclear waste into the river that flows right into "civilized State B." A federal government can also bring a lot more power to bear than any individual state against large multinational corporations and other entities that can and do engage in their own oppression. It's not a simple issue by any means, with probably no perfect solution. A government beholden to the people is a good start. There's too much money in it now for Joe America to have much voice anymore. Corporations-as-people and which have no responsibility to the nation was an abomination of a concept--and that ruling was made a LONG time ago. Today's problems did not crop up overnight.
Same for political parties. Washington warned about those, and he was right. Jefferson was probably right too, and governments have a finite lifespan before they must be renewed. Ours is I think getting past its buy-by date.
Danth