Another good example... Would there be as many unfunded mandates if states had a say in the federal government?
This thread has convinced me that we SHOULD go back. The federal government is as much the states as it is the people, and both should have representation as both have interests. Even the people's state interests are served better by the state having a balanced say in the federal Congress.
I don't think it ever will go back, of course, but it should.
Why do we need two "people's houses?"Breaking up power and sending most of it to the states would just kick the can down the road, not to mention greatly increasing the tension between states. Check out The Federalist Papers for a more thorough description of what I mean. Instead, the way to relieve the tension is (1) to make third parties more viable, a discussion that I will start sometime in the future; and (2) people should not be willing to resort to violence when they do not get their way.
Why do we need two "people's houses?"
I would rather have people who know the states politics to be part of the process than excluded.Why would you want politicians elected by other politicians?
Why would you want politicians elected by other politicians?
becuase when you have all the elected positions of our federal government chosen directly by the people...that is tyranny, ...becuase when the people have all the power, be it anyone who holds all the power, be it one, a few or the many, can be tyrannical.
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?