Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hostage; betty boop
How would limiting federal authority by focusing on states rights and control of states rights move control from the states to the federal government?

You're assuming the consequent that focusing on "States Rights and Control of States Rights" means limiting federal power. It could just as easily mean limiting states rights.

What amendments are you referring to? Can you give examples?

I don't have a particular one in mind but it doesn't take much imagination. How about explicitly expanding the Commerce Clause to encroach on things like state gun laws as has been tried by the left in the past?

I have never heard Levin say or suggest that an Article V Convention of States should be secret nor have I ever heard him refer to secrecy in the original Constitutional Convention. Can you provide references to what you are saying?

I'm not going to rummage through a bunch of old podcasts but Wikipedia says:

"George Washington was unanimously elected president of the Convention,[9] and it was agreed that the discussions and votes would be kept secret until the conclusion of the meeting."

200 posted on 07/08/2015 8:51:51 AM PDT by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies ]


To: semimojo; betty boop

> “You’re assuming the consequent that focusing on “States Rights and Control of States Rights” means limiting federal power. It could just as easily mean limiting states rights.”

Possible point but implausible. To think that the States will convene to limit their rights is not going to gain traction anywhere. Think you need to move yourself over to the reality side of the discussion.

> “I don’t have a particular one in mind but it doesn’t take much imagination. How about explicitly expanding the Commerce Clause to encroach on things like state gun laws as has been tried by the left in the past?”

If the left could use a Convention of States as a vehicle to do such a thing they would have already a long time ago. The reality is they are vastly outnumbered in the Article V arena. Such an amendment idea again falls off the reality platform.

> “’m not going to rummage through a bunch of old podcasts but Wikipedia says:

Fair enough but the issue is not a salient one and has no bearing to the issues above.

So far you’ve suggested that States will convene to limit their rights, move control of their rights to the federal government and expand the Commerce Clause to restrict gun rights. In light of the fact that conservatives control 66 of 99 state legislative chambers I think you will have a very difficult time convincing anyone that your views are realistic.

In the past I have counseled people with exaggerated fears that it is possible for them to dream up all sorts of monsters in the attic but then there is reality and facts which are stubborn things.

I’m sticking with ‘States Rights and Control of States Rights’ as the single topic mission statement for the States to rally around.


202 posted on 07/08/2015 9:16:25 AM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson