Am I misreading you? Are you saying that it is dangerous to have sovereign states? Why?
Justin Schwartz <jkschw at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Question: Isn't it the case that one can treat the federal-state
>relationship as horizontal (though not entirely), as opposed to vertical?
>In fact, isn't that the position of the inaptly named Federalists? That is
>to say, the jurisdictions of the federal and state governemtns should
>overlap as little as possible, such that the States regluate that which
>which is best regulated on a local level, and the federal government
>regulate what is best regulated more globally.
Sorry if the metaphy was confusing. Thats' what I meant.
>As for federalism being a huge pain in the posterior: The theoretical
>problem confonting us today is the same as the one confronting Madison:
??? Au contraire. He had to hammer a bunch of statelets into a nation. We don't.
>Whereas a central government minimizes corruption at the local level, it
>simultaeously makes corruption possible at the global level.
Not really a central issue for Madison.
>Federalism is founed, in parrt, on the belief that the smaller the
>government, the easier it is for it to captured by "special" interests.
What do you mean, Federalism? For Madison it meant a strong central govt. For modern neo-Federalists (anti-Federalists in Madisonian terms) it means a weak central govt.
>The prolem we have today is that even the federal government is "small"
>compared to the size of "special" (corporate) interests.
No, it's not. It's just in bed with them.
>To the extent that certain States are doing a poor job protecting certain
>inalienable rights (notably civil rights), then federalism is good if those
>states can be forced to act via the edicts of national government.
>However, to the extent that the States are doing a better job than the feds
>(more and more likely under the reign of King George II), then moving power
>to the states may the better thing.
The point's been noted. But I'm not talking about practical medium term politics in that sense, but the fact that Madison's compromise, with a pretense that states are sovereign, is anachronistic. And, as the Supremes are currently showing us, dangerous.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
--------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20020604/d0b25cd8/attachment.htm>