Yes the checks and balances were intended to keep the central government in check with Federalism prevailing. How did that work out? My point is that I believe it's the central government that is the problem. And, when I look at the Articles of the Confederation, with only a Congress from state delegates, that maybe that would be better.…
Yes the checks and balances were intended to keep the central government in check with Federalism prevailing. How did that work out? My point is that I believe it's the central government that is the problem. And, when I look at the Articles of the Confederation, with only a Congress from state delegates, that maybe that would be better. No federal election for president, no life long appointment for the supreme court - can you imagine? I know we have national issues but maybe it could be more like Switzerland. IDK, but what we have now is an unsustainable mess.
You can't have law makers without courts to rule on them.
The problem as you mentioned is about who has the power and for how long. If the states controlled the senators and funding of the government (before IRS) then the power remains with the states. If congress followed the one representative per 10,000 citizens, then we would have more control but they said there weren't enough seats so that is a 'no can do' and suddenly they gained more power.
The people have been asleep too long and let this get out of hand.
Yes the checks and balances were intended to keep the central government in check with Federalism prevailing. How did that work out? My point is that I believe it's the central government that is the problem. And, when I look at the Articles of the Confederation, with only a Congress from state delegates, that maybe that would be better. No federal election for president, no life long appointment for the supreme court - can you imagine? I know we have national issues but maybe it could be more like Switzerland. IDK, but what we have now is an unsustainable mess.
You can't have law makers without courts to rule on them.
The problem as you mentioned is about who has the power and for how long. If the states controlled the senators and funding of the government (before IRS) then the power remains with the states. If congress followed the one representative per 10,000 citizens, then we would have more control but they said there weren't enough seats so that is a 'no can do' and suddenly they gained more power.
The people have been asleep too long and let this get out of hand.
Yes, we need courts but maybe the courts could be a state tribunal type system?
Yes. That would be good if the states were the final say.
Again, this is not something that we can change now with COS.