Federalism

[Haggis@wk]

From Randy Barnett on his Bill of Federalism proposal.

I’ve been following this for a month or so and I seen a number of commenters who are concerned that a Constitutional Convention would give the veto and filibuster proof Democrat government the opportunity to tinker with existing Amendments; get rid of or “correct” the Second, for instance.

I don’t know if that could happen since I’m not a Constitutional lawyer, but if it could I'd oppose this on those grounds even though I like the proposal.

[Shapley]

The idea of a Constitutional Convention has been bandied about before. I'm not a big fan of it because, as you note, the liberals can do very serious damage to the thing if we let them re-write it. The Constitution, as written, is a fine document, and says pretty much all that needs to be said. There is no need to re-write it as there is a need to re-read it.

Now, the other side of that argument is that the liberals are already doing a fine job of gutting it, without the rewrite, so how bad could it be? I contend that the liberals, sneaky b*****ds that they are, will slip in subtle wording which can be interpreted in their favour. Many of those penumbras will disappear, replaced by intentionally cloudy language.

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

I think jamie was referring to the notion that the California constitution needs rewriting. All eleven hundred pounds or so of it. Srsly, it's a big puppy.

The one in DC we should leave alone.

[jamiebk]

I think jamie was referring to the notion that the California constitution needs rewriting. All eleven hundred pounds or so of it. Srsly, it's a big puppy.

The one in DC we should leave alone.

That's correct Selma...and I agree

[Shapley]

States Wanting Power Back, Look To Tenth Amendment To Regain It

It's a small movement, but it may gain as the federal government, under President Obama, grows ever greedier. However, having willingly ceded power for decades, they're surely going to be hard to turn that tide in their favour.

[Haggis@wk]

Making Criminals Out Of All Americans.

“

The Founders viewed the criminal sanction as a last resort, reserved for serious offenses, clearly defined, so ordinary citizens would know whether they were violating the law. Yet over the last 40 years, an unholy alliance of big-business-hating liberals and tough-on-crime conservatives has made criminalization the first line of attack — a way to demonstrate seriousness about the social problem of the month, whether it’s corporate scandals or e-mail spam

. . . . There are now more than 4,000 federal crimes, spread out through some 27,000 pages of the U.S. Code. Some years ago, analysts at the Congressional Research Service tried to count the number of separate offenses on the books, and gave up, lacking the resources to get the job done. If teams of legal researchers can’t make sense of the federal criminal code, obviously, ordinary citizens don’t stand a chance.”

“…You can serve federal time for interstate transport of water hyacinths, trafficking in unlicensed dentures, or misappropriating the likeness of Woodsy Owl and his associated slogan, "Give a hoot, don't pollute." ("What are you in for, kid?" your new cellmate growls.) Bills currently before Congress would send Americans to federal prison for eating horsemeat or selling goods falsely labeled as "Native American."

[Shapley]

When I was growing up, there was a saying: "You don't have to make a federal case out of it." The meaning of the phrase was simply that there are some things too small for the federal government's attention. Sadly, in today's world, there is not much that is too small for the federal government's attention.