The 10th Amendment to the constitution states:
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.
I've always been one to say that the government of the United States should not do anything the Constitution does not give it authority to do. As I read the 10th Amendment, that's what I see the writers of the Constitution had in mind. On the other hand I can also see where the States could give certain powers to the centralized Government. I wonder what powers the States have given the Federal Government. There seems to be all sorts of things the government does that are not delegated to it by the constitution. It must be those powers must have been given to it by the states. Now the sticky question comes to mind, how do you take BACK those powers to decrease the size of the government? I think it's extremely difficult to do if not impossible. Like the saying about the camel and the tent. Maybe that's not the right analogy.
What do you all think?
5 comments:
I have no idea what analogy you're trying to make. But, I'm thinking that the only way the people are going to take back the government is to have a civilized rebellion. Like the Occupy movements, only with more focus.
What I was thinking was the analogy that once you let the camel put it's nose in the tent, it's not long before the whole camel is in the tent. Once you start letting the federal government do stuff that is not expressly allowed by the constitution, then expect it to continue until the rights of the states are completely taken over.
Well, that makes a whole lot more sense now. :) Seriously though, I think a peaceful rebellion is what this country needs. I mean, if you consider other periods of time when there was a great deal of political strife, there were sit-ins and various other peaceful protests. There are more of us than there are of them, darnit.
Considering that the South had tried to take some of their power back and got...It really was not about slavery.
That's true the civil war was about the individual states having the right to do certain things. In that case it was about slavery. Do you think that because the south lost that the federal government got bigger and decided that it could dictate what the individual states do? While the federal government has the responsibility to control our borders, is it not the right of the border states to take over where the federal government fails?
Post a Comment