Adam Weinberg
Goldwater Republican
There is a persistence on the left that the building interest in States' Rights, interposition and nullification once again in mainstream politics is a thinly veiled return to the ideas of Jim Crow.
They insist that politicians and thinkers engaging in the notion that states should exercise greater control in the future of their affairs are speaking in code to an audience favorable to returning to a time when people of color were treated as second class citizens.
But it's the left that is speaking in code. They want people who cannot decide whether the 10th amendment is a good thing for them to think this is merely the province of old white folks longing for a time more reminiscent of Gone With the Wind.
When they say that States' Rights are a relic of the segregationist era, they are really saying "These people are just racists and you don't want to get mixed up with them and their ancient ideas, do you?"
It is no different than the standard rhetorical approach to silence arguments for limited government intervention in the economy. "You are simply selfish. You want America's economy/poor Americans to suffer."
It comes from the belief that if the Federal Government does not do it, it will not happen. And once the bureaucracy is well in place, the delusional idea that before the Federal Government did it, the services and resources it now provides were never provided.
10 years ago we lived in a country that had no federal Department of Homeland Security. We are poorer in general for its existence and continued expansion. Before some conservatives stir in their seats for thinking me unpatriotic for saying so, remember that Reagan said government programs once launched never voluntarily reduce themselves in size. It doesn't matter what you call a government department or what its purpose happens to be. Its natural instinct is to expand and regulate our affairs and in doing so deprive the general public of resources.
Some of you reading this were born before the departments of Education and Energy existed. Education, energy, and national security were all provided for in some fashion prior to the introduction of these institutions.
When we look at the federal management of education and energy, it is hard to say that the impact they have had has been one that yields general prosperity and the best policy making for the people who reside in the states.
But the left and even their helpful associates in the Republican Party thrive on the misconception that we need the Federal government's benevolent assistance on every issue, regardless of the sound advice of the Constitution. They need this idea to be as widely distributed as possible because it would absolutely kill the expansion of power in Washington and critical goals of the American left (and I admit, certainly some goals of those who call themselves conservatives).
The bottom line is this: the Tenth amendment is our birthright as Americans just as much as the First and the Second. It is an institution that can maintain our states as vibrant and self-sufficient places for Americans to live, work, and govern their own affairs most effectively.
Do we need any greater example in our times of the Federal government being too top heavy when our states must beg for essential aid and stimulus money for infrastructure and economic programs, and when they must meet endless federal standards for the operation of their institutions while being deprived of resources to accomplish the same?
Just like segregation and institutional racism, large centralization of economic resources is really one of the most outdated and discredited ideas on how to run a country.
Quite frankly, it does not matter whether you are rightist or leftist in this discussion. This will work as well for tax-happy California as tax-reluctant Nevada.
If you ask many of the constituents of the left, they understand the self-sufficient and sustainable idea of "buying local", and yet many will grow reluctant at the idea of "governing local".
You can't launch new initiatives for your interests, public or private, if all of your valuable resources developed by yourself and the people that you live around sit in the public coffers in Washington. This is absolutely a matter of us (as people living in the states) versus them (the institutions and political class that look to Washington as the solution to our problems).
There is an entire generation of Americans that understand this very basic idea who never lived in the time of racial segregation, and the farther we get from those dark days, the more our growing interest in the founding principles of this country is bringing us back to how a functioning and prosperous Republic really works.
They insist that politicians and thinkers engaging in the notion that states should exercise greater control in the future of their affairs are speaking in code to an audience favorable to returning to a time when people of color were treated as second class citizens.
But it's the left that is speaking in code. They want people who cannot decide whether the 10th amendment is a good thing for them to think this is merely the province of old white folks longing for a time more reminiscent of Gone With the Wind.
When they say that States' Rights are a relic of the segregationist era, they are really saying "These people are just racists and you don't want to get mixed up with them and their ancient ideas, do you?"
It is no different than the standard rhetorical approach to silence arguments for limited government intervention in the economy. "You are simply selfish. You want America's economy/poor Americans to suffer."
It comes from the belief that if the Federal Government does not do it, it will not happen. And once the bureaucracy is well in place, the delusional idea that before the Federal Government did it, the services and resources it now provides were never provided.
10 years ago we lived in a country that had no federal Department of Homeland Security. We are poorer in general for its existence and continued expansion. Before some conservatives stir in their seats for thinking me unpatriotic for saying so, remember that Reagan said government programs once launched never voluntarily reduce themselves in size. It doesn't matter what you call a government department or what its purpose happens to be. Its natural instinct is to expand and regulate our affairs and in doing so deprive the general public of resources.
Some of you reading this were born before the departments of Education and Energy existed. Education, energy, and national security were all provided for in some fashion prior to the introduction of these institutions.
When we look at the federal management of education and energy, it is hard to say that the impact they have had has been one that yields general prosperity and the best policy making for the people who reside in the states.
But the left and even their helpful associates in the Republican Party thrive on the misconception that we need the Federal government's benevolent assistance on every issue, regardless of the sound advice of the Constitution. They need this idea to be as widely distributed as possible because it would absolutely kill the expansion of power in Washington and critical goals of the American left (and I admit, certainly some goals of those who call themselves conservatives).
The bottom line is this: the Tenth amendment is our birthright as Americans just as much as the First and the Second. It is an institution that can maintain our states as vibrant and self-sufficient places for Americans to live, work, and govern their own affairs most effectively.
Do we need any greater example in our times of the Federal government being too top heavy when our states must beg for essential aid and stimulus money for infrastructure and economic programs, and when they must meet endless federal standards for the operation of their institutions while being deprived of resources to accomplish the same?
Just like segregation and institutional racism, large centralization of economic resources is really one of the most outdated and discredited ideas on how to run a country.
Quite frankly, it does not matter whether you are rightist or leftist in this discussion. This will work as well for tax-happy California as tax-reluctant Nevada.
If you ask many of the constituents of the left, they understand the self-sufficient and sustainable idea of "buying local", and yet many will grow reluctant at the idea of "governing local".
You can't launch new initiatives for your interests, public or private, if all of your valuable resources developed by yourself and the people that you live around sit in the public coffers in Washington. This is absolutely a matter of us (as people living in the states) versus them (the institutions and political class that look to Washington as the solution to our problems).
There is an entire generation of Americans that understand this very basic idea who never lived in the time of racial segregation, and the farther we get from those dark days, the more our growing interest in the founding principles of this country is bringing us back to how a functioning and prosperous Republic really works.