So Danielle Nelson totally wrote a letter to the editor of the Lansing State Journal and they put it in the Sunday paper. One clever chick, Danielle points out that the automotive debate going on is not a political one, but a constitutional one. You can read the letter in their Op Ed page
HERE.
Or you can just read it below...
Enforce 10th Amendment
I, like most U.S. and Michigan residents, am frustrated by government's interference with private business, as well as many other over-reaches that are unconstitutional. I want this case made loud and clear.
We can argue ideals all day, but when it comes to constitutional lines, these arguments should end and the law should be followed. Not many are in favor of what is going on with the auto industry right now, but it is wholly illegal and avoidable if the Constitution is enforced.
The Tenth Amendment is one barrier to all of these over-reaches. If the public were educated on this subject, it would be extremely helpful to prevent our decline and the growth of such huge out-of-control government.
The Tenth Amendment reads: "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."
Danielle Nelson
Lansing
***comments***
Mike Sears:
Danielle Nelson,
In a Democracy, the people get the government they deserve - Alexis de Tocqueville
WWWIII:
It surprises me that no one has commented on Danielle Nelson/s letter concerning the 10th Amendment. She's right. The federal government has gotten away with violating and distorting the constitution since FDR's New Deal and probably long before that. What's the point of having a constitution that all three branches of government ignore? Which part of the consitution grants authority to federal government to establish a Department of Education and dictatle education policy to the various states? How does establishing a government run health plan meet the definition of "general welfare"? I wonder what other activities the federal government engages in without constitutional authority . . .
ikey81:
I sort of get what you (and Danielle) are saying, but I would argue at least on education. How would we be such a great nation if not for education? I might agree that there is to much personal opinion being taught these days (especially in colleges). But I do think education is an important issue for our country as a whole, and should be given attention by our federal government.
WWWIII:
I'm in favor of education. I just believe it would best be left to the individual states and "the people" of each state. This is what the 10th is about. The federal government is limited to the powers expressly granted it in the constitution while all others are given over to the states or reserved to the people. The constitution is silent on education, whether policy or implementation. States/people should run education. 50 approaches might yield better results than one.
ikey81:
50 approaches is 50% of the reason No Child Left Behind failed (The other 50% is lack of funding). I firmly believe there needs to be a national minium standard. I think there can still be wiggle room for states and individual S.D's to institute regional education. But there really has to be some standard for all. You see examples all across college campuses, and heck, when younger kids move from state to state. My sister and I had to stay back a grade when we moved from NY to MI because MI was so much further ahead in math and reading.
I think my final thoughts for the evening would be that those of us the in the '10th' conversation could agree that what is good for the city, the city pays. What is good for the county, the county pays. What is good for the state, the state pays. And what is good for the country, the country pays.
I guess the real question is what is the (or your) definition of 'general welfare' as outlined in the constitution?
WWWIII:
Sorry to delete so much but needed room. The US already spends the 2nd most per student on education of any developed country without as much success as other less generous countries. The problem is not too little spending. It is endemic to the way education is done on a K-12 basis. A fifty state approach could be thought of as 50 different petri dishes looking to discover what works best and then passing it on as each state seeks gains in education. Right now we have 4500 people at the federal level dictating a single way to all states and graduation rates are 70% or worse. On top of that we lose ground to foreign math & science students. Education needs fixing, not money.
WWWIII:
There's the rub. Before FDR it was taken to mean "everyone" rather than just a segment of the population; seniors, students, women, men, etc. are each segments. General means all and not just a portion or group. If the money the federal government takes in to do deal with many things was left in states, it would often go farther and produce more. This is what was originally intended or the thirteen colonies would not have ratified the constitution. An unrestrained federal government was their greatest fear.
Cheryl and Kevin came over last night and spent the night and we hung out on Saturday. In the morning we went to the Cracker Barrel and totally stuffed face. Then we went to Fart Van and the Priests bought a sweet leather couch. I always like to look at the Clearance Center -its a whole new store every day.
They brought some roasts from the cow that they lovingly raised and tended to and named, and then slaughtered. We butterflied them and put in a sprig of lavender and chunks of blue cheese. Then we tied them up with string and brushed on homemade bbq souce over the grill. Pretty awesome.
