Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
One could argue that they didn't have to foresee those advancements and simply intended on the States handling those matters. States have automobile laws which differ from state to state, for example. Certainly commerce and agriculture laws, even to food safety have state laws.
Constitutionalist does not equal one who supports lawlessness or an anarchist. It simply means, let the states handle those laws. I will never understand why that is so scary to people.
|
And this thought is confirmed in 10th amendment. I never understand why we have to debate every issue on a national level where everyone has to put up with the results whether they want to or not. A more localized approach allows citizens to more easily effect change and doesn't force us to deal with a homogeneous nationwide approach.
roachboy, I do believe the ability to change the Constitution can be a good thing, but I think the pendulum has swung way to far in the wrong direction to a HUGE unmanageable government. Once we enact these types of legislation it becomes very difficult to change or abolish. I mean we've been putting up with some of the problems in the Social Security bill for DECADES. Things like robbing the trust fund as well as increasing lifespans. I see the same thing happening to healthcare with no quick or easy way to change it, in addition to believing it is unconstitutional at the federal level.