I comment on your posts because you would sell the organic sovereignty of the People, which is what the American experiment in government was all about, for State sovereignty.
I would do nothing of the kind but let's take a look at your point. YOU would have The People up in arms descending upon the snakes in DC. Imagine for a second what the Founders may have thought about the diffuculty of travel back in the day. Would you concede the point that by design of our Constitution was created to preserve MOST of the governing closer to The People? So that when The People had a beef they could take it up with their local government. If you can't concede that point, there's really no need for additional discussion of the issue.
I cannot concede the point because it is incorrect. There have been a number of cases on County supremacy (such as Boundary County) that refute your notion that local government has the most power because it is closest to the People. Wouldn’t that be great! Unfortunately, that is not how the system was designed. You can’t fight smart if you fight on the basis of how you think things should be, rather than how they actually are.
This is how power flows: In the United States, the People delegated power or authority to govern through their written constitutions. A portion of power was given (delegated) to the federal government, and a portion to the State government.
The People also “retained” power to individually self-govern the exercise of various God-given natural rights – such as freedom of speech. They did not delegate the power to govern these rights to either the federal or State governments.
The federal government is separated into three branches: the legislative, executive and judicial. The legislature was given the power to make laws in the specific areas enumerated by the Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States. (Congress has pushed pass these enumerated limits through judicial interpretations of the “necessary and proper” clause, the Commerce Clause, the supremacy of treaties and the power to “tax and spend.”)
The federal legislature also created the many federal agencies. Historically, Congress would pass an Act or law and the agencies would make implementing regulations consistent with that law. In the 20th century, Congress began to give the unelected agencies the power to actually legislate through regulation. Also, the Executive or President, who is supposed oversee the implementation of the laws made by Congress, began to establish his own policy through the issuance of Executive Orders. More recently, the President has created and appointed unelected “Czars” to ensure his policy is implemented administratively.
It is important to remember that a federal agency enforces its regulations on the individual directly and not through the State. (The federal government cannot dictate that a State implement a program, but can condition receipt of federal funds on the passage of some program on the State level.) A similar, but separate governing system exists on the State level. State legislature- created agencies, boards and commissions also regulate individual action directly. These agencies often try to get Counties to assume implementation of a State regulatory program, such as the endangered species act, or they try and get Counties to pass local ordinances to implement State policy. The Counties can refuse to do so.
The California constitution Article 11, Section 1 says that “the State is divided into counties which are legal subdivisions of the State.” There is also a procedure for establishing local government under a corporate charter. However, our local county is not a chartered County.
The California constitution declares the powers of County government under Section 7 as follows: “A county or city may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general [State] laws.” In addition, the legislature has delegated other authorities to the County such as Zoning and land use planning (General Plan.).
Our government is not hierarchical, but is supposed to be a dual and composite system of government where power has been intentionally fractured and separated to protect and maximize the liberty or freedom of the individual. The exception is that when two governments overlap in jurisdiction and pass laws that conflict. In such a case, the federal law “pre-empts” or supersedes the State law. Where a General Law County such as ours is involved, both State and federal law pre-empts local ordinances where they are in conflict.
Many local people are frustrated that County government doesn’t intercede to protect and block the individual from State or federal regulatory agencies. As these agencies have been given authority by the legislature to directly regulate the individual and their regulations supersede local ordinances, the County’s power is limited.
Our county has researched legislation and has found many federal and State laws/regulations that direct agencies to coordinate or cooperate with local government. They are to take into consideration local plans and County input so far as these are not in conflict with their guiding laws. In incidences where these laws apply, our county is actively asserting its role in accordance with these clauses. However, it should be remembered that coordination is not a veto on federal or State agency action. (Several northern CA counties have resolutions laying out these empowering clauses.) http://www.stewards.us/strategies/frameset_strategies.htm)