For the U.S. Constitution


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : For the U.S. Constitution

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 7 · Next
Author Message

Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,467,291
RAC: 180,725
Message 1404514 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 1:52:48 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 20:55:46 UTC

--

Profile James Sotherden
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 8835
Credit: 34,936,179
RAC: 58,458
United States
Message 1404532 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 3:28:19 UTC

I dont get it. Why do we have to have more ammendments to take back the states rights? Were they not spelled out right the first time?
Seems to me our elected idiots in both houses need to called to task for giving that right away.
____________

Old James

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12581
Credit: 6,888,030
RAC: 6,862
United States
Message 1404534 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 3:50:51 UTC - in response to Message 1404514.

Look squirrel guy, you're still confusing the term "statist" with the term "state."

Statism refers to the belief that the FEDERAL government should control everything in your life.

No, you have that wrong. Statism refers government control period. I see you some lines later essentially argue that each of the 50 US States is a nation state, so you undercut yourself anyway.

Statism noun: the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic and political controls in the state.

State noun: an organized political community, living under a government.
Note the level of that "state" is not mentioned in the definition.

The tea party wants to remove political/economic controls from the federal government and give them to the 50 state governments. They essentially want to return to the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, an anti-federalist position.

As a libertarian I want the political controls quashed and destroyed and not transferred to another corrupt institution. I don't need damn tea statists multiplying by 50 the work needed to be done to quash those controls!

Ask yourself this: If the political/economic control is quashed at the federal level and through the supremacy clause also at the state level, does that get done what you want? If you say no then you do want the controls which means you want to move closer to a dictatorial form of government at some level. That is statism! If you said yes, join the libertarian party. Why don't you take the quiz on the front page and let us know where you score?

____________


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,467,291
RAC: 180,725
Message 1404681 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 13:59:29 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 20:55:30 UTC

--

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31771
Credit: 13,198,907
RAC: 37,805
United Kingdom
Message 1404717 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 15:18:37 UTC

Wouldn't you like to allow the states (or the people, respectively) the freedom to choose how they want to be governed? ...

No I wouldn't, because I wouldn't trust the average person to be able to judge what would be right and sensible.

Allow states to lean left or right, laissez-faire or dictatorial, zero government or communist, and see which states become successful and which ones fail? I'll say it again: It's the competition among the states that have made this country the envy of the world.

No it hasn't! The rest of the world sees the USA as a disorganised group of people that can't collectively agree on how to run their own country. You have 50 States each with their own Governor. Those Governors run their patch like a private little country with their own homegrown laws to suit themselves. You have Countys, and County Sheriffs that strut around like pompous little prats like the Sheriff of Nottingham in Robin Hood days in the 1200's. The UK has moved on a bit since Fiefdoms and Lords of the Manor. The last election gave almost a dead heat for President, then along comes this Electoral College outfit and says, never mind what the people want, WE'LL decide who the President is.

The USA bangs on about their famous Constitution written by the Founding Fathers, that went into effect in March 1789. Less than 6 months later in December 1789, the first 10 amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, had been ratified. In total it has been amended 27 times. Talk about not getting it right in the first place, these Founding fathers didn't do a very good job did they? This infamous 2nd Amendment to bear arms was relevant at the time it was written some 225 years ago, because the only way to remove corrupt Governments and administrations then was by armed militia. These days they get voted out of office or get impeached. But of course it still gives every American a good excuse to own a gun.

Why not tear the lot up, and start again with a clean sheet of paper and produce something more relevant to the 21C? The USA is supposed to be the most powerful country in the world, about time it got it's house in order.



Message 1404728 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 15:39:36 UTC

No I wouldn't, because I wouldn't trust the average person to be able to judge what would be right and sensible.

Why not tear the lot up, and start again with a clean sheet of paper and produce something more relevant to the 21C? The USA is supposed to be the most powerful country in the world, about time it got it's house in order.


YOu Be Funny.

The Politics Section of Da Forum is Mostly Inhabited by UKers Bashing the US.

ThAt Be Funny.

Little Islands Go Away.

ThIs Big Disorganized, Fiefdom Ridden Country is Here To Stay.

But, ifN Youse Gots Nuttin' Betta Ta Do, Bash Away.

Bound FO "IT" IT. "There" There Always. Hey Hey.


____________



Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,467,291
RAC: 180,725
Message 1404738 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 16:09:29 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 20:55:11 UTC

--

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12581
Credit: 6,888,030
RAC: 6,862
United States
Message 1404757 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 17:22:28 UTC - in response to Message 1404681.

Gary, yes, each state IS a nation state.

So you understand statism can and does occur at the state government level as well as the federal level. Just as it can at the county, city or neighborhood council level.

It appears you're not *reading* what I'm writing.

I do, 100%. I think you are having a hard time understanding all the consequences of what you are saying.

Now think about the extreme statement you just made. "tea statists multiplying by 50"

Now you didn't quote the entire thing. That means you didn't understand what was said, or didn't want to.

Do you actually think Hawaii will be taken over by the tea party? Do you actually think Illinois will be taken over by the tea party? Massachussettes? New York?

It doesn't matter what statist party controls a state. What matters is that a statist party controls a state. Be that democrat, republican, green, whig ...

Now you might get the multiply part. Take the federal supremacy away and ... Instead of blocking one government from statism, 51 need to be blocked!

Wouldn't you like to allow the states (or the people, respectively) the freedom to choose how they want to be governed?

Looks like you need an example. Any long haul trucker, think roads which you said should be federal, can tell you there is a nice eastern state that has a law on the books requiring truckers to purchase fuel in that state. There is a nice federal interstate highway that clips a corner of that state. Runs about 3 miles in the state. Their highway patrol dedicates a lot of time to enforcing this law on that segment of highway. The single fuel station and the only turnoff makes a lot of money from this law. This is what the Tea advocates, and it is happening today on a federal interstate highway.

I can see another coming down the pike if the tea statists get their way. Missouri, home of legitimate rape Todd Akin, member of the Tea Party Caucus, will pass their law defining life starting at conception and their won't be any Roe v Wade federal supremacy to block it. Miss Virgin Victim will get legitimately raped and somehow Todd Akin's theory won't work and she will be pregnant. Fortunately she has money, so she will go to liberal California and have a legal safe abortion. The moment she returns to Missouri she will be arrested for capital murder. You will claim it is far fetched. It already has legal precedent.

The legal theory is that a citizen is bound by the laws of their nation state no matter what soil they are on. So they must comport themselves in accordance with their citizen states laws at all times, in addition to the laws of the soil they are on. Have a friend, a retired law enforcement officer, who has made arrests under this theory. Cases have gone to SCOTUS under this theory. SOCTUS says it is a legitimate law. This is what the Tea advocates!

What happened to that full faith and credit clause ...

...Allow states to lean left or right, laissez-faire or dictatorial, zero government or communist, and see which states become successful and which ones fail?

You want states to fail?! Who pays for it? How do they declare bankruptcy? Is the Tea really that daft?

Just how does the supremacy clause (s)quash all political/economic control at the state level?

When all or any portion of political/economic control is outlawed it acts with this outlawing to spread the outlawing 50 times!

Yes, the supremacy clause is a vital part of the constitution. Without it, we might as well be living under the articles of confederation. However, the original intent was to give the federal government the authority to arbitrate conflicts THAT ARISE FROM STATE CONSTIUTIONS/LAWS.

Right, like the conflict that one state allows a medical procedure that another state outlaws, say abortion.

Today, the supremacy clause is now interpreted to justify things like obamacare.

Funny, the PPACA is a tax. Therefore it does not need to rely on the supremacy clause. Or is the Tea saying the federal government will not be able to have any taxes after they get their way?

BTW, the PPACA is actually a tax credit. If you have a special situation, own a qualifying medical care policy, you get a credit of the "penalty" amount. Just like having an oil well being depleted gets you a credit.

____________

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,833,704
RAC: 2,932
United States
Message 1404767 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 18:45:27 UTC - in response to Message 1404738.

No I wouldn't, because I wouldn't trust the average person to be able to judge what would be right and sensible.


Chris, well you've just emphasized the main premise that left wingers and right wingers argue about in all the social issues of the day. The right-winger asserts the average person DOES know what is right and sensible.

Then why the right-wing opposition to abortion, same-sex marriage, &c.?

Seems Chris has a poor opinion of what the average person can accomplish, though your characterization of the difference between left and right does not appear to me to be balanced. From the libertarian site Gary linked the right-winger maintains that the average person should be constrained in their personal habits, while the left-winger maintains that the average person should be constrained in the economic habits, the statist believes that the average person should be constrained in both their economic and personal habits, and the libertarian in neither.

Based on this description it's clear that the tea party is a right-wing movement, that Gary is not a statist, and neither are liberals.

____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,467,291
RAC: 180,725
Message 1404769 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 18:46:31 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 20:54:43 UTC

--

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31771
Credit: 13,198,907
RAC: 37,805
United Kingdom
Message 1404775 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 19:03:50 UTC

First off any comment that I make is not personal about any individual here. The UK also gets its fair share of bashing around these boards. What I was aiming for was a bit of inward introspection and thought, to see if the USA really had got it all correct rather than an inbuilt belief that they had.

The Politics Section of Da Forum is Mostly Inhabited by UKers Bashing the US.

I don't bash the US, I'm one of the few that doesn't, I'm grateful for the Special Relationship that we have, and always have been.

@Guy - that is a robust response and deserves an in depth reply.

Chris, well you've just emphasized the main premise that left wingers and right wingers argue about in all the social issues of the day. The right-winger asserts the average person DOES know what is right and sensible.

Glad you can see it as well. So left wingers say one thing as they would do, and the same for the Right wingers. So what is the truth?

What you perceive is based on a minority of people in Washington DC deciding how the country should run and then forcing it on a majority across the country who disagree by further disregarding the U.S. Constitution because a majority of the producers are too busy making a life for themselves to take notice

Of course a minority run the majority, how else can you run a country. Exactly the same over the pond. We elect a Government for whatever tenuous reason and then spend the next however many years undermining it. There used to be a time when people looked further then their front doors and looked out for other people and their country. These days people slam the front door and say sod everyone else as long as I'm alright. How do you change that attitude?

And it appears you have a misunderstanding of the purpose of the electoral college.

As I understand it, the purpose of the Electoral College is to even out the votes per state given the population demograhics. Looking at a map of the USA the vast majority of the people live along the western and Eastern seaboards. in the middle you have these millions of acres of wheatfields or whatever where population is sparse. The result of the last election was 1/3 didn't vote, and roughly 1/3 each for Romney and Obama. So how come that Obama got in with a significant majority? If I have the Electoral College wrong, I will be delighted to be educated differently.

As Gary has stated (and I agree), 50%+1 doesn't work

No it doesn't!! That is the same "first past the post" system we have here. 51% of the electorate are happy 49% are pissed off. We recently had a referendum for an AV alternative voting system. Quite often a smaller party will regularly come a close second in elections but never actually win. Using the second and third choice option would dramatically change things. The two major parties knew that and blocked it.

I disagree vehemently that our corrupt officials are voted out or impeached.

But the point is that the procedures are there if you wish to use them. The fact that they are not used is another matter. Bill Clinton was impeached but later acquitted, why wasn't he kicked out? Blake Farenthold thinks the House of Representatives has the votes to impeach President Barack Obama about the authenticity of the president’s birth certificate, but it won't happen will it? What is the point of having procedures if you don't use them?

The 2nd amendment is as important today as it was 200 years ago. What's happening in Egypt today cannot happen in the U.S. because of the 2nd amendment.

I'm glad to see a positive side to that. Then why do we have to put up with the NRA and the gun lobby banging on about inalienable rights to own guns?

And if we tear up the lot and start over again, what do you suggest?

Fair question! Your country, so you tell me. What do you want to see?

I think we had a pretty good beginning and since times have changed all I think we need to do is refresh what we started with.

You've already had 27 amendments, how many more do you want?

After all, it would be hard to really make an academic argument that what we started was a failure from its beginning and throughout its history. (although I'm sure some in here might now try to list all the negatives that have happened and ignore the corrections that have occurred.)

The original was amended 10 times in the first 6 months! The whole shebang was relevant and pertinent at the time it was drafted and for the reasons it was drafted. I an suggesting that it has been tinkered with so many times now that it has become woolly and lost its way, and is not relevant any more 200 years later in the 21C. Do you honestly think that if the Founding Fathers were alive today and were asked to write a new one, that it would be very close to their original?

And I don't think we're the most powerful any more.

I would suggest that you are still perceived to be.

Anybody who would challenge us today by force would get one heck of a first punch. But then where would the second punch come from if it were needed?

The first punch would probably be sufficient, and if needed, you have your international allies to form a coalition against your enemy.

Mark Levine's suggestion is to put U.S. government decisions back in the hands of the STATE, OR THE PEOPLE, would put a little more effort into thinking about what they're voting for and would therefore make better choices.

I can't agree. When you have a world of sheeple they need to be managed. Unfortunately we have a bad breed of sheepdogs.

Without faith, there is no hope.

I gave up on the human race 30 years ago. I have my family and my friends which come first. But, and this is the big difference, I still try, unlike most, to try and make changes for the better in various ways, but I know that I am really wasting my time. But I still try. More fool me really I suppose.

Good luck with the new Mod hat, I wish you well.

Chris S


Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31771
Credit: 13,198,907
RAC: 37,805
United Kingdom
Message 1404777 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 19:07:38 UTC

Seems Chris has a poor opinion of what the average person can accomplish,

Yes, that is true.

From the libertarian site Gary linked the right-winger maintains that the average person should be constrained in their personal habits, while the left-winger maintains that the average person should be constrained in the economic habits, the statist believes that the average person should be constrained in both their economic and personal habits, and the libertarian in neither. Based on this description it's clear that the tea party is a right-wing movement, that Gary is not a statist, and neither are liberals.


Care to describe yourself?

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8949
Credit: 253,235
RAC: 73
Canada
Message 1404782 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 19:15:47 UTC

This whole discussion reminds me of the scene in Oliver Twist where the pickpockets shout "stop thief"

The constitution isn't the problem, Amercia got hi-jacked and is now run by the rich for the rich. Congress is just a puppet theatre run for corporate interests. The "lamestream" media is run by a few rich guys who keep pointing that finger everywhere but where you really should be looking. The Tea Party was originally funded by those same people to promote their agenda.

Guy needs to take a look at who's pulling his strings and stop drinking the KoolAid.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12581
Credit: 6,888,030
RAC: 6,862
United States
Message 1404795 - Posted: 18 Aug 2013, 20:02:16 UTC - in response to Message 1404769.

And I think you are having a hard time understanding the consequences of what we are in the process of *doing* to ourselves right now even though it's in full view for everyone to see.

Oh, I see it. I just don't think the tea solution is the only answer or anywhere near the best answer.

Your long haul trucker example is a perfect example of why the supremacy clause (and the commerce clause) was put in the constitution. If that little 3 mile section is being used to extort money from people passing through, then I would fully support the federal government stepping in and telling the state to stop doing it because it's violating the commerce clause. I don't see how the tea party can support this literal highway robbery from a state.

States build roads too and can rob, er... tax for them too. And how can the feds do this proposal of yours without another power grab from the states sovereign ability to levy taxes? You want to have your cake and eat it too.

Centralizing power in the hands of a few in Washington DC will only make this ENTIRE NATION FAIL.

Why does the tea still insist on allowing any government to have power? Is it not because they disagree with government having those powers, but because they disagree with how those powers are being used?

Right now all those powers you want the states to have so they supposedly won't use them are presently denied to them. Leave it that way and take those powers away from the federal government as well. This is the easiest way to get the issue solved. Take the easy road.

____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 1
Korea, North
Message 1405196 - Posted: 19 Aug 2013, 19:32:43 UTC - in response to Message 1404094.

Well apparently you three don't like the U.S. Constitution and have become totally intolerant of other people who disagree with you. From your perspective, it's either your way or the highway. Not very open minded, are we?

Let me give you a little history lesson.

The rebellion of the Boston Tea Party has many similarities with the political movement established in 2009 known as the Tea Party. I'll refer to them as the "old tea party" and the "new tea party."

In the days of the old tea party, the British government and the American Loyalists attempted to establish and maintain control of the colonies. When the Patriots first began to resist such efforts, those in power tended to deny that there was any real resistance from anyone except EXTREMIST, FRINGE INDIVIDUALS. Let's call this the "DENIAL PHASE."

But as there were more and more protests, denial was no longer an option, and they tried to ignore the movement. Their hope was that if they paid no attention to the protesters, it would be less likely that others would join them and the movement would simply fade away. Let's call this the "IGNORE PHASE."

Unfortunately, ignoring the movement did nothing to lessen its intensity and, in fact, gave it time to grow even more powerful. The colonists ended up inflicting significant damage on those in power, forcing them to fight back, in many cases, with more force than necessary. Many of the regulations subsequently imposed were a part of this punitive "RESISTANCE PHASE."

The more the established powers resisted, however, the more determined the colonists were to overcome that resistance. At some point in the struggle to regain power, it becomes easier for a ruler to exempt an unruly but powerful subject from punishment than to suffer defeat. During this "EXEMPTION PHASE," it became increasingly easy for the Loyalists to desert the throne and align themselves with the Patriots, who were gaining power and the admiration of the populace.

Many of those formerly in power--the American Loyalists, dedicated to the British crown, for example--began to believe and act on the very things they once railed against, conforming to the ideology and actions of their previous enemies. This we shall call the "CONFORMING PHASE."

The final phase is the "TRANSFORMATION PHASE," in which the ideology of the resistance movement becomes the mainstream philosophy governing a now changed society. And in the case of the American Revolution, the ideas of the old tea party--less central government, more local rule, and more personal responsibility--became the basis for a new society that rapidly rose to the pinnacle of the world.

The old tea party came to be because large segments of the population had felt increasing oppression and betrayal by the very government that was supposed to be taking care of their needs.

In late 2008, early 2009, there were a couple of things that happened that caused great concern. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the bailout of several major banks, and talk of obamacare. There were scattered protests but those in power in Washington DC and those in the lamestream media denied their significance. DENIAL PHASE

Shortly after, these protest became known as "tea parties" but the political establishment and the media ignored how fast they were growing. IGNORE PHASE

Then the media began making fun of the protesters in hopes that it would discourage others from joining in. The passage of Obamacare in December 2009 was like pouring gas on a fire. The new tea party cannot be ignored any longer. We are now in the RESISTANCE PHASE as demonstrated by some of you in here by doing things like denying me the ability to send you private messages, saying I am only ONE, claiming I have multiple personality disorder, requires mass hypnosis, claiming I (we) need psychoactive medications and attacking me at every chance.

The new tea party is not part of the republican party. The new tea party hold democrats AND republicans responsible for excessive spending, incessant pork barrel projects to benefit special constituent groups, and intrusion into the private lives of citizens.

We are also now in the EXEMPTION PHASE. Exemptions here, waivers there, here exemption there a waiver, everywhere exemptions and waivers. Several large companies who contributed to the obama campaign, congressional employees, federal workers, IRS, etc etc etc don't have to follow the law in Obamacare.

Soon some of you in here will realize the errors of your ways and many other statists will realize the promises of the current regime were all lies. More and more of you will realize there was never such a thing as free health care. More and more of you will realize that YOU are the rich he wanted to raise taxes on. More and more of you will realize the government has spent more money than the next several generations can pay for. And we'll transition through the CONFORMING PHASE.

And maybe, JUST MAYBE, within the next couple of election cycles, we can start the long, arduous process of digging our way out (TRANSFORMATION PHASE) from the damage done to this country by liberals in the past 40/50/60 years in time for our grandchildren to experience real prosperity once again.

Since we are still in the RESISTANCE/EXEMPTION PHASE, I expect to be further insulted. Which will tell me I've won in the arena of ideas.

Centralizing power in the hands of a dictator is no way to live.

someone forgot his history again. the boston Tea party was a minor event. The revolution representative of about 1/6 of the population. Hardly a majority thing. Among those directly opposed to a revolution were the brits, american loyalists and Hessians. the remaining 1/3 either didn't care or didn't want to get involved. again hardly a mass movement.

I seem to be in unison with the others in thinking that you and the Faux new folk are the only keepers and knowers of the constitution. This is hardly true. I'll go back to the strict constructionism that most if not all conservatives slather over and disagree with you again that this is a living document using your round tip scissors and elmers glue to cut, gut and remake the constitution in your own light is a hugely ignorant thing to do.

You may want to follow the Supreme Court and read up on its trevails through the centuries. They are the actual Deciders on what is and isn't constitutional. And until recent court decisions never overturn solid and valid judgements.
the country has evolved, the people and their thinking has, and the gov't has as well.

funny you mention tea partiers as if they were a separate party. They are republicans and libertarians in the republican party. That is all it is. the big tent keeps getting emptier and emptier so they just have to scream that much louder to make themselves heard no matter how irrelevant they really are.

Liberal damage to the country? like the modest national debt before reagan and the ever increasing debt since. Seems we may be locked into a viscious cycle of ignorant fools demanding less gov't but still wanting the gov't to take care of everything they used to take care of. this is unreasonable.

The other hand has a reasonable request that the ever increasing wealthy folk pay back what they have taken from the people. I personally consider what the wealth have done as wealth redistribution only in a manner that hurts everyone but the few.

____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 1
Korea, North
Message 1405219 - Posted: 19 Aug 2013, 20:05:38 UTC

Your long haul trucker example is a perfect example of why the supremacy clause (and the commerce clause) was put in the constitution. If that little 3 mile section is being used to extort money from people passing through, then I would fully support the federal government stepping in and telling the state to stop doing it because it's violating the commerce clause. I don't see how the tea party can support this literal highway robbery from a state.

States build roads too and can rob, er... tax for them too. And how can the feds do this proposal of yours without another power grab from the states sovereign ability to levy taxes? You want to have your cake and eat it too.



I don't think any Interstate should be hijacked by a state and used as a tollway. If a state wants a toll way build it yourself and disassociate your road from the federally funded interstate road system. Consider Oklahoma, it has toll ways and non toll freeways. the Tollways are constantly under repair. why? because the roads were bought and paid for long ago. they need to justify their tolls in rebuilding and repairing roads that aren't old or broken.

Take Texas and the North Texas Tollway system(NTTS), It has had a toll way in north Dallas for the better part of 25 years. This road again has been bought and paid for many times over. So why doesn't it revert back to a non toll road? because the NTTS creates more projects and needs the additional money to pay for the roads. Currently, the NTTS is constantly losing money because of poor project management, massive paychecks for its executives and above all poor planning. The roads they built after the North dallas tollway have been bad ideas and have few users. I'd think the people of texas would get fed up with the nonsense but governor good hair wants more of this privatization.

So, you see its always a good thing to through good oney after bad.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Sirius B
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 11268
Credit: 1,685,522
RAC: 3,630
Israel
Message 1405227 - Posted: 19 Aug 2013, 20:22:29 UTC - in response to Message 1404775.

I can't agree. When you have a world of sheeple they need to be managed. Unfortunately we have a bad breed of sheepdogs.


Good God, where's me damned pills?

+1
____________


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 43,467,291
RAC: 180,725
Message 1405237 - Posted: 19 Aug 2013, 20:38:12 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 20:53:17 UTC

--

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 1
Korea, North
Message 1405243 - Posted: 19 Aug 2013, 20:50:19 UTC

thank you for the diagnosis. from a 12 step program point of view please do your own 4th step and I'll keep to mine.

Denial seems to run deep here. Seems that the king would like things his way because people are to stupid to know what's good for them. Seems someone was sputting this off about Dems lately. How sad that one does exactly what one accuses the other of then just blah blah blah did not DENIAL yours not mine BLAH BLAH blather and you are wrong I'm better than you because I like pain and suffering of the poor.

As little as I like religion I still think its every good persons responsibility to take care of the poor, indigent, and disabled. That might seem political but its not.

Churchs cannot take care of all the needs of the people. they just don't have the money. Gov'ts step in and subsidize the churches efforts. Sadly, our Gubment allows just about anyone to be a nonprofit which takes away from a non profit that does good and gives it to a nonprofit that either has high paid golfers winning its prizes or are linked to a political agenda.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12581
Credit: 6,888,030
RAC: 6,862
United States
Message 1405263 - Posted: 19 Aug 2013, 21:27:26 UTC - in response to Message 1405219.

Your long haul trucker example is a perfect example of why the supremacy clause (and the commerce clause) was put in the constitution. If that little 3 mile section is being used to extort money from people passing through, then I would fully support the federal government stepping in and telling the state to stop doing it because it's violating the commerce clause. I don't see how the tea party can support this literal highway robbery from a state.

States build roads too and can rob, er... tax for them too. And how can the feds do this proposal of yours without another power grab from the states sovereign ability to levy taxes? You want to have your cake and eat it too.


I don't think any Interstate should be hijacked by a state and used as a tollway. If a state wants a toll way build it yourself and disassociate your road from the federally funded interstate road system.

If the Feds paid 100%, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aid_Highway_Act_of_1956, then you might have a point, but the states do pay part of their construction. I have yet to see a Federal Government road crew repairing and interstate highway. I see the local state crews doing that.

However this is getting off the point. The point being that states already have huge powers to do underhanded government money grabs. Tea kool aid wants to give them even more.


____________

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 7 · Next

Message boards : Politics : For the U.S. Constitution

Copyright © 2014 University of California