It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can we all come to an agreement? The Federal government needs to be stripped of it's power.

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Two words..."State's Rights".

Leave education to the states.
Leave healthcare to the states.
Leave infrastructure to the states.
Leave law enforcement to the states (with the exception of Border Patrol...which is better aligned with national defense).
Leave environmental to the states.
Leave energy to the states.
Leave transportation to the states.
Leave agriculture to the states.
Leave housing (HUD, etc.) to the states.
Leave Labor to the states.

The only thing which should be federal is Defense and Homeland Security (but get rid of the TSA...they're worthless).

Can you imagine how much money $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$,$$$ we just saved right there????????




posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: rickymouse

Okay I think I'm giving up on this thread.

What I said was "Some things may need to be handled at the federal level" and "state government should inherit a lot of the power and responsibilities the federal government "

What people took that as " Let's instate anarchy and chaos and have no federal rules at all "


Here is what happens. Where do you draw the line. Each state will start to try to seize power and things will fall apart. I do believe that our States need to have their own laws and that the Feds should consider these laws as worthy of considering and allowing in most cases. But we also do need some government regulation and enforcement so no one state can have more rights than others.

I find that what our Feds should be regulating they often don't and what they should let the states regulate they seize control of. I live on the great lakes, and some of the states down south would love to drain the great lakes so they can raise river levels for their boats. Thank god there are Federal laws regulating these lakes. Someone could be bribed to allow them to get drained if there was no regulation.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: deadlyhope

Most of what you are calling for is exactly what Trump has said he wants to do.
He wants to reduce Federal control over many things and give that power back to the states.
There are way too many Federal regulations, and Trump is already working on reducing them.

But there are certain things that need to be handled Federally for common sense reasons.
These are covered in the Constitution, and include things like national security, immigration, trade deals with other countries, etc.



If they get rid of a lot of this nonsense federal regulation and give the regulation to the state, I would be happy. But some things should not be given to the states. I believe you should have to get a permit to purchase a handgun, otherwise convicted criminals would be able to buy them legally. This needs to be federal, otherwise a criminal from one state can use the gun in the city right across the state line.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: rickymouse

Okay I think I'm giving up on this thread.

What I said was "Some things may need to be handled at the federal level" and "state government should inherit a lot of the power and responsibilities the federal government "

What people took that as " Let's instate anarchy and chaos and have no federal rules at all "


What we need are private run state prisons and lock ups.

So the malcontents can be locked away from normal people....

What the hell, let's just turn everything over to the corporations. They have our best interest in mind. Isn't that Trumps intention anyway?

See your disconnect?....
edit on 11-2-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

In other words, the courts could simply stop ignoring the 10th Amendment.



The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

G'da deadlyhope! Of course I knew you didn't call for anarchy.. and I agree wholeheartedly... Unfortunately, government is still government... Only we'd have 2. Local-state.. and all state-federal.

We have that now... messed up as it is... But something has to change. Agreed.

edit on 11-2-2017 by mysterioustranger because: Fat fingers



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:29 AM
link   
We need a larger State foot print and a smaller Federal footprint. There is a reason we are 50 united states and not just one big democracy. It seems those on the left want that single democracy where the fed dictates everything and the majority rules.

The problem is what does a person who disagrees with the feds do?....where do they go? Take the legalization of pot as example. One state you can smoke it open, but the feds will put you away for 20 years... If you do not like how a state is then move to another state that agrees with your views...very simple... There is a reason I will not live in CA, well I would if someone was willing to pay me an exorbitant amount to do so. If the whole US became CA then no choice is available and many on the left would like it that way.


edit on 11-2-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

That is another thing that Trump has said he wants to do.
He wants carry laws to be honored by all states.
Right now, if someone from my state with a valid concealed carry license drives 30 minutes away accidentally crossing into the neighboring state, they can go to jail for a very long time, because that state does not honor our state's license.

One of the things that federal government needs to do is regulate interstate commerce and laws that affect people across state lines.

As for what happens within a state - that should be up to the states.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
We need a larger State foot print and a smaller Federal footprint. There is a reason we are 50 united states and not just one big democracy. It seems those on the left want that single democracy where the fed dictates everything and the majority rules.

The problem is what does a person who disagrees with the feds do?....where do they go? Take the legalization of pot as example. One state you can smoke it open, but the feds will put you away for 20 years... If you do not like how a state is then move to another state that agrees with your views...very simple... There is a reason I will not live in CA, well I would if someone was willing to pay me an exorbitant amount to do so. If the whole US became CA then no choice is available and many on the left would like it that way.



The left not only wants one country completely under federal rule, they want one world under one world rule.

You are correct...
One of the things federal should do is make sure that states do not create rules that violate the constitution. Other than that, they should not regulate the states.

If people do not like how things are going in their state, they can elect people into office who will change things, or they can move to a different state.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope


I believe the Federal Government needs a massive reduction in power.

Too late. They have all the power. Enforcement, money, weapons, massive military and police agencies.

Try anything, see how they swarm all over you.

I'm afraid the only disturbance you will be allowed is attacking a few business establishments with boards and sticks, like ATM machines and Starbucks for instance.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Two words..."State's Rights".

Leave education to the states.
Leave healthcare to the states.
Leave infrastructure to the states.
Leave law enforcement to the states (with the exception of Border Patrol...which is better aligned with national defense).
Leave environmental to the states.
Leave energy to the states.
Leave transportation to the states.
Leave agriculture to the states.
Leave housing (HUD, etc.) to the states.
Leave Labor to the states.

The only thing which should be federal is Defense and Homeland Security (but get rid of the TSA...they're worthless).

Can you imagine how much money $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$,$$$ we just saved right there????????

Do you realize how many Federal subsidies will be lost?

Why, it would be anarchy... oh.

Go head on.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Caver78

And I've said several times that I am not saying the Fed should not make any laws, or should be gotten rid of or made 100% obsolete - Just that mostly we should be able to do what we want, and in some instances may have to follow national guidelines, or work within a standard.





Wasn't arguing that point with you, just pointing out not everything the Feds have done is garbage. I see the Feds as sort of a check & balance to some of the BS States want to ram down our throats. Everyone is all "local powers" are the ticket! But States make some amazing BS laws as well.

On the local level it gets even worse.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Exactly.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
The main things would be road quality, aviation and passports along with the military and the ability to ensure that things like gas/electricity are all sorted so you don't blow things up and cause more trouble



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Caver78
a reply to: deadlyhope

I agree with the sentiment, but having seen what some of the States have come up with on their own, some Federal laws are necessary. Which is an unpopular notion, but whatever.



The answer is in your statement.

You disagree with a particular state law. Yet, enough people in the state wanted it that it become state law in the first place.

Because you disagree with it, however, your will should override the will of the people who actually live in the place where the law will have effect. That's exactly why people dislike the notion of overextending Federal powers.

A little more complex than "whatever".


edit on Ev09SaturdaySaturdayAmerica/ChicagoSat, 11 Feb 2017 15:09:45 -06009232017b by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Its no secret that federal government is too full of itself to be of any value to anyone. But the idea of federal law and state law working together is viable and necessary. It just has to be handled by adults who have the best interests of the entire nation in mind at all times.

When congressmen say things like, "I know how my constituents feel, but I am voting in opposition to them because I think it is the right thing to do..." we have a problem. When government says things like, "We know more than you and you don't have the clearance to find out if what we tell you is true or not - so your only choice is to accept what we tell you", we have a problem. This list can go on indefinitely, and that too is a problem.

The way things are going as we speak I fully expect the 9th circuit court to declare the entire Constitution un-constitutional.

We have a problem.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
I think the Federal government is to powerful, and I would like to see the states regain their footing. But, right now I am not willing to make the liberal states and more powerful as they have proved they can't handle responsibility.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I Think there certainly needs to be a restructuring. When you have a government that has more interest in representing corporations, banks and foreign interests than representing its own people, there's a serious problem.
I have said for quite some time there needs to be a complete overhaul of the system. Problem is, if you're going to restructure it, tear something down, you have to have an idea of what you want in place of the existing system. Therein lies the problem.

edit on 11-2-2017 by SpeakerofTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope



I'm not so sure about this. Get rid of the FAA? No more standardized air traffic control. And when I take the 747 from Kennedy to LA, I get to comply with the aviation laws of NY, PA, OH, IN, IL, MO, KS, CO, AZ, NV, and CA. And since there would be no federal certification for aircraft or pilots, or technicians, the airline can hire a bunch of bicycle mechanics to maintain, repair and inspect (and even fly)the aircraft your butt (and mine) is going to be sitting in. No GPS for navigation and no one to operate and maintain the instrument landing systems.No uniform certification standards for aircraft. No medical standards for pilots. No federal airway system, so everyone just goes wherever they want, creating new alloys of Delta aluminum mixed with United aluminum.
My job takes me sometimes to Somalia and Angola. What you seem to want takes us there.



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

The Federalist Papers were what deemed law to be given to the federal government. Then the Bill of Rights was tacked on.

Our Founding Fathers had great differences when it came to building our government overall and states rights.

There was a great divide with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton.

It ultimately gave Congress and the Courts power over the Bill of Rights for individuals and states rights.

It may be time to rewrite this continuous and obviously living document-contorted as it has become.

States right should prevail especially based on modern times.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join