Proper Functions of The Federal Government:

[Vladimir Lenin]

Federal Government, is a tyrant, it will always be this way as long as the Government controls a military force.

The Federal Government must be limited to the essential item of:

1. Protection for Citizens (Fraud and Violence, or crimes that create Victims)
2. (Excellently thought out by El Brujo) To provide a common system of organization such as Licenses for all things as well as Measurments.

Everything else must be controlled by the states. Any victimless crimes, drug use, prostitution etc. need not be crimes at all.

The state government ought to control Public Education, the states will know more about what the necessary education should be. The School Districts also have a say in this and may set their own standards so long as they meet or exceed those set up by the State.

The state government ought to concern itself with with the Infrastructure of the Nation. For example, let's say a road needs to be built and will go through five states, these five states will make deals and get the road built, each completeing their sections with their own funds.

When in fighting wars the Nation should use it's caution before entering any war, it must however fight a war to protect it's Citizens and Intrests.

There will be more, posted later.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Reserved: For future posting.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Reserved: For future posting.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Reserved: For future posting.

[El Brujo]

You can't reserve three posts like that you cheater.

Anyway, there are some things besides protection the federal government needs to do. Federal regulation of interstate commerce and forcing the states to recognize things like drivers licenses from other states (there is a term for this, but I forget) have worked far better than the states doing it themselves. All of this is outlined in the constitution, however, so it's really a moot point. If the government would stop ignoring its own laws we wouldn't have a problem.

[Sosobra]

John you can edit a post by hitting the edit button no need to reserve.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Yes I know but I find it easiest if I can divide things into three segments/points. Makes it much easier.

[Earl of Rochester]

Honestly, as long as the Federal Government does not interfere with personal liberties I could care less. I understand at one time state rights were an important thing, but holding on to them is keeping your foot in the past.

Its amazing that so many people care more about state rights, than personal ones.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Honestly, as long as the Federal Government does not interfere with personal liberties I could care less. I understand at one time state rights were an important thing, but holding on to them is keeping your foot in the past.

Its amazing that so many people care more about state rights, than personal ones.

What I just outlined would protect Personal Rights.

[SorelusImperion]

Federal Government, is a tyrant, it will always be this way as long as the Government controls a military force.

agreed

1. Protection for Citizens (Fraud and Violence, or crimes that create Victims)

Agreed but the Protection of it's citizens can not stop with watching economic process and ensuring that nobody is playing false. You have to actively balance as the invisible hand may be present but it is neither just nor fair nor is it humane. Relying on the forces of a free market alone and just protecting the free market is dangerous as wealth will by law of nature be concentrated in the hands those who have the ambition to impose their will upon others. And as wealth is power those individuals will end up beeing in the control of the nation. Another issue is that of inheritance as it will ensure that the distribution of wealth will be rather static as long as a dynasty survives.

The state government ought to control Public Education, the states will know more about what the necessary education should be. The School Districts also have a say in this and may set their own standards so long as they meet or exceed those set up by the State.

well... that's how it works in Germany and it acualy is a great problem as it makes the creation of educational standars very difficult. If the education of the Texans is different from the one you would experience in New York or Washington or Florida you have to carfully evaluate which education has the highest quality. A very difficult task, not to mention potential monetary problems as a good education is expensive.

The state government ought to concern itself with with the Infrastructure of the Nation. For example, let's say a road needs to be built and will go through five states, these five states will make deals and get the road built, each completeing their sections with their own funds.

It offers advantages and Problems alike much like your former proposal but in this case I disagree with you since ínfrastructure like streets is of GREAT importance for the very basics of your life. While an uneducated person can still do easy tasks and get a living out of it (if the system is constructed sufficiently) our modern world absolutely needs a developed infrastructure. Giving all this solely into the hands of the regional governments would delay the process making it much more difficult also monetary issues would play a role. While rich states could finance a fully developed road system (mind that roads are only one part of the puzzle) poor states are less lucky. Germany has the Eastern regions which have not enough money to get back into track and need federal support Italy has the Southern Regions (Napoli, Sicilia). To prevent this from happening the federal government has to support regional governments in times of monetary crisis if there is a sufficent reason for it. Say if Florida asks the Federal government for subsidies to built a bridge spanning the pacific the federal government should have the brain and the nuts to tell the regional government to ******* OFF.

When in fighting wars the Nation should use it's caution before entering any war, it must however fight a war to protect it's Citizens and Intrests.

You will have to ask yourself the question wether te interest of it's citizens are of the only importance or if there should be some international rules to prevent another era of Imperialism where the interest of the state and it's citizen was the only moral obligation for a government. Would you for example consider the Japanese invasion of China justified (doesn't matter wether you take the 1st or 2nd Sino-Japanese War)?
Were the Revolutionary Wars in Europe (those with Nappy ) justified ?

[Earl of Rochester]

I didnt say otherwise.

Im saying I don't understand all this give the power to the states nonsense. States have proven to be more ineffective than the federal government at progression.

Obviously some powers are better for regional government, but there isn't really much harm in giving the fed a lot of power provided it respects personal liberties.

[El Brujo]

What I just outlined would protect Personal Rights.

The states have always done a fairly poor job of protecting individual liberties when left to their own devices. They too must be subject to the U.S. Constitution.

[Vladimir Lenin]

agreed



Agreed but the Protection of it's citizens can not stop with watching economic process and ensuring that nobody is playing false. You have to actively balance as the invisible hand may be present but it is neither just nor fair nor is it humane. Relying on the forces of a free market alone and just protecting the free market is dangerous as wealth will by law of nature be concentrated in the hands those who have the ambition to impose their will upon others. And as wealth is power those individuals will end up beeing in the control of the nation. Another issue is that of inheritance as it will ensure that the distribution of wealth will be rather static as long as a dynasty survives.



well... that's how it works in Germany and it acualy is a great problem as it makes the creation of educational standars very difficult. If the education of the Texans is different from the one you would experience in New York or Washington or Florida you have to carfully evaluate which education has the highest quality. A very difficult task.




It offers advantages and Problems alike much like your former proposal but in this case I disagree with you since ínfrastructure like streets is of GREAT importance for the very basics of your life. While an uneducated person can still do easy tasks and get a living out of it (if the system is constructed sufficiently) our modern world absolutely needs a developed infrastructure. Giving all this solely into the hands of the regional governments would delay the process making it much more difficult also monetary issues would play a role. While rich states could finance a fully developed road system (mind that roads are only one part of the puzzle) poor states are less lucky. Germany has the Eastern regions which have not enough money to get back into track and need federal support Italy has the Southern Regions (Napoli, Sicilia). To prevent this from happening the federal government has to support regional governments in times of monetary crisis if there is a sufficent reason for it. Say if Florida asks the Federal government for subsidies to built a bridge spanning the pacific the federal government should have the brain and the nuts to tell the regional government to ******* OFF.




You will have to ask yourself the question wether te interest of it's citizens are of the only importance or if there should be some international rules to prevent another era of Imperialism where the interest of the state and it's citizen was the only moral obligation for a government. Would you for example consider the Japanese invasion of China justified (doesn't matter wether you take the 1st or 2nd Sino-Japanese War)?
Were the Revolutionary Wars in Europe (those with Nappy ) justified ?

You make good points:

1. I assume your talking about Monoplies when you mention dynasties. Monopolies create victims, the small buisnessman, or the consumer are both crucified. For example if a Company has lower prices because it's more efficent, small buisnessman should'nt complain. Where as a company is running so cheaply and is losing money, then the small buisnessman should complain and the Gov. needs to protect the Capitalist system.

2. Intresting point, the wealthier states may have higher educational standards. I agree, with you, however a state government is genral more efficent because the issues effect it more. Besides, if all the states gathered seprately and agreed on a standard of education good.

3. I agree, protecting the rights of citizens and a nation's intrest is necessary. However the bridge to nowhere and projects like it is what I'm trying to fight.

[Vladimir Lenin]

The states have always done a fairly poor job of protecting individual liberties when left to their own devices. They too must be subject to the U.S. Constitution.

Victimless crimes.

Does two gay people marrying create victims?

See what I mean?

[El Brujo]

Victimless crimes.

Does two gay people marrying create victims?

See what I mean?

I'm talking about how the states suspended habeas corpus and other basic rights until the Supreme Court brought them in line. States can be wonderful little tyrants if you let them.

[Rush Limbaugh]

You want to know the proper function of the Federal Government ? Thats easy

We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union,, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

And thats it.

form a more perfect Union
establish justice
provide for the common defense
promote the general welfare
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity


Now pick something and see where it fits. Welfare for instance is only mentioned as to{promote the general welfare}. This means things like roads and sewers. Public works. Not feeding the poor. They believed in charity.

[Vladimir Lenin]

I'm talking about how the states suspended habeas corpus and other basic rights until the Supreme Court brought them in line. States can be wonderful little tyrants if you let them.

Of course uphlding the basic rights of the Constitution. These are just additions/edits to it.

[Sétanta]

Protecting our citizens from foreign enemies, regulating trade and insuring fair elections.

And building interstate highways.

That is about it.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Its pretty basic. If Federal law or the constitution come in conflict with state law the state loses out.

[El Brujo]

Of course uphlding the basic rights of the Constitution. These are just additions/edits to it.

We don't need additions/edits to the Constitution. We need to follow the damn thing in the first place.