Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducimus
My thought has always been that issues like Gun control, should be left to the state, NOT the federal government. Why?
Each state is different. Has its own demographic, their own cultural values, their own prominent religious or political beliefs, it's own economy, etc etc, the list goes on.
What's good for California, is not good for Utah, and vice versa. The problem with Federal laws that are on the scope of gun control, or abortion, or whatever, is it's trying to make a square fit into a round hole.
|
A good argument for state's rights. We are not all the same in the USA. Under the constitution and its amendments, federal laws must be equally applied across all the states and apply equally to all the citizens.
But the states are not all the same, nor are the citizens.
Is the world as dichotomous as that? Of course not.
Slavery should be illegal in all states and frankly I don't care if a state wishes to bring it back. Slavery is wrong.
But where do you draw the line. And when it comes to legislative authority a line must be drawn.
At what point does federal legislative authority end and state legislative authority take over.?
Finding the extremes are easy
Outlawing slavery? - Federal authority is appropriate, really can't be left up to the states
Establishing speed limits in residential areas? Federal authority is not appropriate. It can and should be left up to the states.
But what about everything in the middle?
Where is the legislative authority line drawn and who gets to draw it?
The answer, in the past, has been "who has the money". States have voluntarily given up a lot of their sovereignty because the federal government has given the states money and the states have grown to rely on this money.
The polite word is extortion.
Until the environment changes where the individual states can operate
mostly independent of the federal government, nothing will change.
It should not come as a surprise that the federal government is not exactly encouraging states to become too independent of the federal government.
Which is why I favor a schema where personal federal tax is abolished and the individual states collect and deliver taxes to the federal government. That will give the state, as a whole, a lot more leverage then just little me.
The US I would like to see is one where
The states have a great deal of freedom in setting their laws as their constitution and legislation see fit (with some restrictions)
Where the citizens have the opportunity of "voting with their feet" and move to a state that has a set of laws that agrees with their opinion.
States with unpopular laws may find themselves lacking in tax revenue when many people move out.
States with popular laws may find themselves with increased revenues when people move in.
Of course that can create a whole bunch of other problems which is why it is a good idea I ain't in charge.
