States should rise up.

Well, Abstractematics doesn't seem to be calling for a revolution. He's calling for the states to rise up and force an amendment to the Constitution. What about, I don't even fucking know, because he didn't even mention one issue which he thinks might be a good idea to amend right now.

And it's not like the state governments aren't fighting for their rights anyway, whether it's stupid shit or something worth working for. Specific examples: Arizona's shit stupid law regarding immigration going before the Supreme Court. There's several southern states in that lawsuit with them. And a few states which have legalized gay marriage on their own, without waiting for a federal blessing. The first one should be shot down, the second doesn't necessarily need an amendment to be legalized, but if it does there's other ways to make amendments besides the states calling a referendum. Which we know because the states have never done that.

Ah.

My mistake then.

In any case, States' Rights is a cause I've never been comfortable with because it tends to have some ulterior motive behind it (examples: segregation, immigration reform, gay rights. Not comparing those things mind, just saying those are all reasons people have gotten behind the "States Rights" cause), and don't tend to think about the long-term implications.

go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine

The problem with that is not so much state rights, but the hypocrisy of the US right wing. The fight for segregation was of course all about state rights, but for gay marriage and the like there should be a federal ban. Ugh.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

x3 Well, I actually mentioned one - the anti-corporate-personhood amendment they've recently proposed, if it doesn't get through Congress.

I guess I'm asking why the states' rights advocates are complaining at the wrong place when the answer's right in their face. No matter how powerful the federal government grows, the fundamental rights are reserved in the states, who can overturn all that if only they would unite.

States have rights the same way the federal government does. Maybe it's incorrect to call it "rights". But the point is, the Constitution's built in a way such that certain states' rights cannot be taken away, and they're the kind of rights that can fight against federal intervention at will.

edited 17th Dec '11 7:48:48 PM by abstractematics

Now using Trivialis handle.

If only they would unite? Isn't "the US states, united", exactly what the US federal level is?

edited 17th Dec '11 7:48:40 PM by Octo

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

That's a bit of a problem because the national government overseeing the entire federal relationship is not the same as the united force of several states joining together. Historically, they've fought.

It's a misconception that the United States has a 3-way checks and balances. There's at least 4, the 4th being the force of state legislatures applied to a federal setting. They're the ones managing all elections and ratifying any amendments.

edited 17th Dec '11 7:51:09 PM by abstractematics

Now using Trivialis handle.

IMO it is always of disadvantage to give federal states a say on the federal level. As I've said, federalism should all about states' internal autonomy.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

But they do have internal autonomy, and they always have. No nation outside US recognizes a state, other than being a local phenomenon in the US.

I'm not saying the states should have a federal role that they don't have. They already do, but people don't know how to use it.

edited 17th Dec '11 7:55:35 PM by abstractematics

Now using Trivialis handle.

Of course they have internal autonomy. US states have quite, quite more rights than German states, for example. My point is that is all federalism should be. Not that this is the case either here or in the USA, but ideally IMO states should play no role at all on the federal level.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

So you're saying that the states shouldn't have the power that's laid down for them in Article V?

That means we're stuck with our Congress and only Congress. I don't think I like that.

Now using Trivialis handle.

I'd even go as far as to let you be stuck with only the House of Representatives. IMO, the Senate is a very bad idea.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

Here's the problem with big business; the states' governments are just as much if not more in the pockets of the businesses as the federal government. So asking for the states to force an amendment like that is kind of impractical right now. Two of Nebraska's reps are for the Keystone XL pipeline, and pulling dirty tricks to try and get it pushed through.

So basically, this particular situation comes down to the people more than state governments to force by voting out the people who are pandering to the big companies. And protesting, and petitioning, and whatever other methods there are to campaign for change.

Edit; Octo, if you get rid of the Senate the California will have the most pull of all, given their fifty five senators. The only state close to that is Texas, and we have like half the reps. There's a reason we have the two house legislature as a compromise.

edited 17th Dec '11 8:14:59 PM by AceofSpades

It's because the United States was a group of thirteen colonies, essentially macro-sized villages owned by Britain.

I'm not talking about state autonomy overriding proportional representation here. The issue is using the state advantage to have a say against a problematic federal government, but states' rights people, who argue about powers that the federal government deprived the states over history, can't see that for some reason.

State officials are closer to people, though, and there's more direct influence. So the key point is that people can actually do something about our federal governments by influencing the states.

Now using Trivialis handle.

The Federal Government is the supreme legislative body of the United States. We went to war over the state's rights.

Nullification and secession are a revolutionary right, not a Constitutional one. This is because the Constitution is a pact between the people of the United States, not a pact between the states themselves.

It is not the state government's job to keep the Federal government in check. The Fed has supreme authority.

I'll cite Article 1 Section 1 of the United States Constitution:

All legislative powers herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representitives.

And I'm citing Article V, which is where the Constitution claims that you're allowed to change it.

Again, no matter how powerful the federal government grows, its basis is indeed the states, which have the power to fight back all along.

Now using Trivialis handle.

That requires two thirds of the states....

Yes, and they should realize the power of cooperation, instead of just moaning that they have no power.

It's a case of a constitutional right being neglected because people aren't aware of it enough.

Now using Trivialis handle.

Well, yes, of course. Because California also has so many more people than any other state! This is not about the rights of California as a state, but about the rights of every single citizen within California, which should have the right to be exactly as well represented as every single citizen in Wyoming.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

Which is why there is both the house and the senate.

The problem is for them to call a convention large number of the states have to agree for once.

edited 17th Dec '11 8:33:36 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?

It's because the states were meant to be sovereign.

I'm referring to situations that can speak on behalf of all states in general. I've seen articles about how the federal government has usurped the rightful authorities of the states at every turn. Don't complain to the federal government about it, saying that it should back down. Look at the states! The answer's right there.

Now using Trivialis handle.

I know that to pass legislation it needs to pass both houses, but the power to block legislation is already a power all on its own.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

Yeah, here's the problem. Due to the regional nature of such issues as the states might feel like they need to fight for "state's rights" there's not two thirds interested in fighting over a particular issue. Especially big business, because I fucking repeat, they're as much in the pockets of big business as the federal government. What you're stating is impractical.

And, frankly, in the matters of getting big business out of government, your method is also fucking stupid. It needs to be fought by the people to get it out at all levels of government.

And fuck the states being sovereign, that's part of what led to the Civil War. The states haven't been sovereign since the South lost that, and for good damn reason. It is in no way practical.

Edit: Octo, the problem with that is that then California could then run rampant over Wyoming, and potentially ruin the lives of the citizens there because what the fuck does California care about people who live in Wyoming? The Senate is there to equalize things and give smaller states the ability to keep from being bulldozed.

edited 17th Dec '11 8:46:28 PM by AceofSpades

The US states are not sovereign, period. "Sovereignty" is a concept of international law. In international law, only the USA itself is a sovereign country. The rights US states have are a matter of the US constitution, not of international law, hence they are not sovereign.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

I'm not the one that brought up the amendment. De Marquis is.

All I'm saying is that people need to be more aware of what states can do. It's not about the impracticality due to hold by big business.

And it's not about how states are misproportioned by population. I don't think you're getting the topic here.

By sovereign, I mean that "United States" cannot exist if there are no states, because states are required to establish and amend our Constitution. In other words, it's a federal (and not a unitary) republic. And the states have a rather powerful reserved power - the power to amend the constitution all by themselves.

edited 17th Dec '11 8:51:29 PM by abstractematics

Now using Trivialis handle.

You're the one that made a fucking topic about it!

And damn ninjas.