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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (67643)	9/7/2004 8:25:39 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793924

I keep trying to get a discussion going on federalism, eventually maybe will have some takers, who knows? Have you considered a thread for that discussion? Federalism has emerged as a topic in different places on SI often enough to suggest interest. It's possible that my loggy memory could produce the names of a few of the posters who engaged.

To: Ilaine who wrote (67643)	9/7/2004 8:17:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793924

I would agree to your idea of letting the states decide such social issues. There is some problem in that the federal government grants benefits to married couples, and in other ways gets entangled in these issues even when it doesn't decide the issues. I suppose if you had a very simple flat tax and less government spending those wouldn't be as much of a problem but to get that you would be asking for an even bigger change in the federal government. One question would you also have equal opportunity laws and such be decided on a state basis? Assuming they didn't involve interstate commerce or federal contracts I don't see how the constitution gives the feds power here. Tim