Would you support a Constitutional ammendment to abolish States

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by wiredup72, Aug 25, 2016.

  1. wiredup72 macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #1
    I would.
    States are antiquated and unnecessary. Counties work just fine. Most, if not all, States just pass work down to specific counties to operate anyways.

    Federal Legislation and Regulation already trumps state law as it is. Interstate commerce is the biggest trump card. Environmental issues and individual rights issues are better served Nationally than by regional tastes.

    I don't like the State poaching that goes on with companies. It is destructive to communities. Offering tax breaks to multi million and billion Dollar companies to move states which mostly only affect the tax breaks of stockholders (not stakeholders), board members and executives, but don't end up really having much impact on operations or employees, except in a disruptive way, is counter intuitive to us a single nation.

    We don't need 50 separate regulatory bodies that muck up energy and healthcare markets.

    It doesn't take congressional members a month to take a carriage to Washington D.C.

    The Senate can remain with the states renamed territories, but we can dissolve all State Governments.

    It could equalize Federal money distributed to territories.

    People say the best representation happens locally, then County administration of funds and operations would be watched more closely and maybe City vs. Rural issues in Territories would dissipate.

    And I guarantee the voter participation rate would go up. (I know some people wouldn't like this, but that is a little elitist in my opinion).

    Why even be a single Nation if we are going to be so divided. If you really Love America, put America first of your State.

    C'mon people. Let's have a Constitutional Convention!
     
  2. Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #2
    Hell no. The Federal Government just needs to be made smaller and less influential, like it was when it was formed.
     
  3. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #3
    Why? We could eliminate way more bureaucracy without states. It aint the 17'th or 18th century anymore. They simply aren't necessary. Do you not love America?
     
  4. smallcoffee macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
  5. colourfastt macrumors 6502a

    colourfastt

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    #5
    Alexander Hamilton believed in eliminating the states at the Constitutional Convention in 1787; he was right then, and it's right now.
     
  6. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #6
    Counties? I don't know what it's like outside of Connecticut, but aren't most counties pro forma?
     
  7. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #7
    So? They still exist. Have court houses, DPW's, etc. And I will ignore the glaring weirdness of NY "Towns" and the fact that NY City is made up of 5 counties.
     
  8. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #8
    The city, county, state, Federal Govt are all part of a hierarchy. I think States are needed, however I also think a Federal Govt with oversight to insist on things like education standards and judge laws for Constitutionality is a must.

    And frankly, I don't believe the Congress is prepared to take over the job of State government. They can't currently even do their own job. The end result this would make people dislike government even more.
     
  9. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #9
    The opposite would mean to dissolve the United States of America.
     
  10. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #10
    NO!
    It's not a hierarchy. It's a distribution of jurisdictions. The Federal government is not supreme to the State government, except where allowed by the States through the US constitution. Are we kidding here?
    And counties and cities are creations of the State, under its jurisdiction that has nothing to do with the Federal government.
     
  11. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #11
    Why's it weird?

    In Connecticut, every square inch of territory is assigned to a town or city. Counties are for the uncivilized.
     
  12. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #12
    Congress wouldn't have to do state's jobs. Congress regulates and disperses money. The executive branch manages.
    Counties and cities do the bulk of the work that State's do. And the big stuff that states do, like emergencies, we have seen are wholly dependent on the Federal Government.

    State police departments could easily be broken up or merged to the county level.

    Someone tell me what we actually need stated to DO. What do we need their legislatures and taxation laws for? Heck, we could even keep the titular function of Governor and their office to admin the new territories' historical monuments.
     
  13. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #13
    Eliminate states? I think that's crazy but we definitely have way too many local governments. Cuomo ran in NY saying he'd...


    * 20% reduction in number of state agencies

    * Ask private sector to find ways to reorganize 1,000 state agencies

    * Consolidate 10,000 local governments

    Now if he'd only do it.
     
  14. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #14
    In NY, counties are divided into Towns; then we have cities, villages and hamlets. They are like mini counties.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 25, 2016 ---
    BTW, I grew up in Texas and Louisiana and I totally don't buy into the whole State's Rights bs.
     
  15. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #15
    You have no idea what the US government is. Do you think that the is the federal government that gives powers to the States?
     
  16. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #16
    No that is not what I think. Actually, I used to work for the federal government, was a contractor, and also a non government worker when I lived on The Hill for 7 years. I'm confident in my knowledge of what it is, which is why I asked the question about needing a constitutional convention or amendment.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 25, 2016 ---
    And I am aware that it is the States that originally granted the Federal Government its rights.
     
  17. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #17
    You are extremely confused on the basics of US government.
    Let's take this example, for simplicity we say that such "territories" are geographically equivalent to current states.
    Explain me how a Senate in which 2 members of each territory are elected would agree on giving a tax break in a specific area in order to increase its population. Texas is hot, most people would love to live in California. Same taxes (for simplicity) means that more people will flock to CA. TX would lose money big time. How can a giant federal senate with jurisdiction on ALL the territories' taxes agree on giving one tax break on a specific area?
     
  18. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #18
    I am asking if people are ready to start talking about real political EVOLUTION, as opposed to revolution.

    I gotta go, but I appreciate ALL responses.
     
  19. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #19
    A constitutional amendment? The states wouldn't go for it.
     
  20. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #20
    I don't think it would be an evolution at all. It would mean going back to a large centralized empire/kingdom.
     
  21. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #21
    True, corporations get a lot and ask a lot of influence from it.

    Isn't the main point of federal government involving transport, defense, and other basic services?

    Hmmm, there is always a bureaucracy. Every company has its own set of processes and workflow as well. As they continue to buy each other out, since competition is a bad thing, won't their own bureaucracies become no less angst-inducing?
     
  22. wiredup72 thread starter macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #22
    There is no reason to adjust breaks for regions. People can freely move about this country as it is now. What are you actually asking?
     
  23. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #23
    Caps? You playing word games? ;) That's your opinion. States oversee counties, the Federal Govt oversees States within it's Constitutional bounds. Are you saying that with a legal conflict, that a County Ordinance takes presedence over State Law? I'm no legal scholar, but I don't believe that's the case.
     
  24. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #24
    And this is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about.
     
  25. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #25
    What, we don't have that now? Who knew?

    Isn't there always one, in some technical form or another, regardless of label applied? Structure vs anarchy seems inevitable. You might like anarchy, at least until you feel the bad side of it, but by then everyone might be so self-centered that they won't give a ****?
     

Share This Page