Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Father Terrence who wrote (12055)	7/18/2001 5:13:11 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

I do not accept the unconstitutional expansion of federal power. The federal income tax, for example, was authorized by amendment, and the expansion of regulatory power has largely been under the aegis of the power of the federal government to regulate interstate commerce. I admit that there has been some over- reaching, and that it should be corrected, but in most instances, the rationale was plausible enough. In most of these cases, constitutional amendments could have been passed, for example, by FDR had he used his popularity to that end, and it was preferable to rely on creative interpretation by the courts to opening that can of worms. That is why Robert Bork considers the tenth amendment a dead issue: if the court insisted on it, there would be a move to amend the constitution to bring it into conformity with current practice. I have seen this myself in organizations which develop customs at odds with their by- laws, and procrastinate in updating the by- laws until someone makes an issue of matters. Then, they change the by- laws rather than abandon current practice........