-
Originally Posted by
Johnson85
This is incorrect. It took a while for the constitutional structure to be flipped from where powers were presumed to be held by the states unless specifically provided otherwise to one where powers were presumed to be held by the federal government unless specifically proscribed. While there was disagreement between the founders as to just how much power the national government should have, the ones that favored a limited federal government won, at least nominally. While the supreme court has more or less interpreted it out of the constitution, we still nominally have a federal government of limited, enumerated powers with every authority not specifically delegated to the federal government held by the states or people.
We still had a real distinction between intrastate and interstate commerce until the great depression. Until the series of obamacare cases, it was still a live question as to whether there were meaningful limits on the federal government's powers under the commerce clause besides those specifically proscribed in the bill of rights.
Your statements back up what I am saying. You are saying that outside forces (Supreme Court interpretation, new laws, Obamacare) are the cause of us shifting to a more centralized government. I'm saying that from the beginning, the Constitution was written in a way that while starting with limited, enumerated powers, the door was left specifically and intentionally open to give more powers to the central government - at the choosing of the majority. That power of choice still rests with the people - albeit the choices we make regularly push us further toward a more powerful central government. The flip side of it is that the power of the majority still has the right and authority to remove those powers that have been ceded to the central government (theoretically). As a people, we seem to elect people who crave and believe in the power of governing as they see fit, not as a voice of those they represent. And that is not an exclusive held by either party.
"After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
- Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.
Reply With Quote