To: jf55510
That's nonsense, this is a proper federal issue.
No it isn't.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
What you are defending is Bill Clintons federal food safety stragic plan, and you know what a statist he is.
19 posted on
03/18/2006 8:20:17 PM PST by
hedgetrimmer
("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
To: hedgetrimmer
This is clearly a federal issue. How could a food company produce a product that would have to win approval in fifty different states?
Want to reduce your insurance costs by at least 25%? Abolish the seperate rules in each state (and their high priced Insurance commisions) and develop one set of rules for the country. What would be wrong with that?
(note: my company reduced rates across the country by 30% ON HEALTH INSURANCE in Nov.2005, but had to wait till 22Feb. in Colorado to offer the lower rates because the savings to our clients had to be approved by the State)
30 posted on
03/18/2006 8:31:39 PM PST by
bybybill
(If the Rats win, we lose)
To: hedgetrimmer
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
What you are defending is Bill Clintons federal food safety stragic plan, and you know what a statist he is.
No, what I'm defending is a perfectly sensible piece of legislation.
Art. I, sec. 8
[Congress has the power] to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with Indian tribes.
This is clearly commerce among the several States.
39 posted on
03/18/2006 8:43:28 PM PST by
jf55510
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson