3,662 comments posted · 52 followers · following 34
I have no idea how you have jumped to the conclusion that I am imply that business and politics never mixed until the modern era of politics. They have always been mixed together since man has made the effort to form governments to better their society.
Until this point I have never really had a problem with you and I would have never realized that a simple question would so infuriate some one of your stature, so therefor I try my best to not infuriate you in the future.
To answer your question that would depend on the individuals entering in Marriage.
Illegal Immigration laws, marriage laws, guns laws, etc....
How does any State have any Sovereignty when what ever they d pass as a State law can be taken to the Federal Supreme court to be over turned? Also we people from other states bring the laws suites about state laws in states they are not even a residence of because they have nothing better to do then to force their owns views on to other people.
State lines have a meaning that has been lost on most of the people of this country, they help to define Sovereignty of the States, when the Federal Government runs rough shod over the States they no longer have their Sovereignty.
Also if it is possible could show where there is example of Federalism happening today in our country.
" It shows you don't understand the importance of keeping as much power as local as possible. "
We were just discussing yesterday the size of community to pull elected officials from and I pointed out where in the Constitution that the House of Representatives members where to only represent 30,000 people with the statement that we should return to this. I am a person that thinks the best form of government is the on that is closest to the people, which most places is either a county government of a city government.
I understand that when the Founding Fathers created our Constitution that each State was viewed as its own Sovereign Country that entered into a compact of mutual agreement, but can you honestly tell every one here that we still have that same view? We have a Federal Government that has all but eliminated any State Sovereignty thru the use of grant money, earmarks, etc... The States are now dependent on the Federal Government to balance their budgets, with being said how will any of the States balance their budgets once the Federal Government runs out money.
When my tax dollars go to another State cover their misappropriations of funds with out having any say in their legislator process there is no need for State line to separate us and all matters should be handled by the all glorious Federal Government.
The size of community is important, I think we have one person trying to represent to many people as the congressional districts are current constituted.
Article 1 Section 2
"The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative"
We should return to this part of the Constitution, at the least is would slow down the legislation that actually passed thru Congress. If this part was followed today there would be approximately 10,000 Representatives in the House. With that thought in mind how much harder would be for the lobbyist to get enough people to agree with them.
One person can only represent a certain amount of people and still maintain some semblance who those people actually are.
I personally think the main problem is directly related to size and scope as to actual policies.
"2) Elect people you know or know of in the community." Again we agree, what size of community are we discussing for the person to be pulled from?
"3) Keep in touch with those people when they leave for DC" Do not know how this will help keep them inline once they are there.
"4) Hold them accountable and vote them out when they don't speak for you." What if they do not speak for me but there are others in our community that do believe they speak for them?