what is the dark side of federalism?
406761
The way it doesnt perform for the people.\n Philosophical contributins have addressed the dilemmas and opportunities facing Canada, Australia and Europe, to mention just a couple of areas where federal arrangements are seen as interesting solutions to accommodating differences among populations divided by ethnic or cultural cleavages yet seeking a common political order.\n Within the realm of what is considered normal in government, It serves itself with disregard to the benefits it should be giving to the public, rather, serving it's own existence.\nHence, its self fulfilling.
1062020
Federal has a greater jurisdiction or control area than the State has. Feds. also have much more power and control than the State does.
816424
B...and imagine the shocker when Jefferson pulled the Louisiana Purchase off...that was a broad interpretation.  Federalists (conservative) died out.  Republicanism died out (is was the more liberal party.)  Eventually, the Know-nothings (that wanted to get rid of Catholic power), and the Democrats came forward.  The Kansas-Nebraska Act pretty much split the Whigs, the Democrats and the Know-nothings in half.  The Whigs faded away along with the Know-nothings, and the Democrats split to become our two major parties.
1111690
I think that it is an unprecedented attempt of the Federal Government to interject itself to an area which it has never been authorized to previously involve itself.  As a Southerner, I am against it.  I do not want marriage administered with all the efficiency of the Social Security Administration.\n\nI am for the preservation of marriage.  Please keep the Feds out of it.  The Federal government's powers have been limited since its inception to regulating interstate commerce, international relations, civil rights, and similar areas where "Balkanization" of the 50 states would impede our country's effectiveness.\n\nIf you are so inclined to "defend marriage" please do so with your local and state government.  People who disagree with you could at least go to another state in accordance with the dictate of their own conscience.\n\nEDIT: To Grandma Susie down there... if any "marriage" or family has failed it is the fault of the members of that family.  To randomly place blame on others for one's own faults is rather silly.\n\nThe Democrats never broke up any of my relationships... despite my most sincere requests to them.
1091563
federalists wanted a strong central govt anti's wanted a weak central govt.
310525
Checks and Balances\n\nWhen you have three branches of the federal government, you need a government where one branch of government is constantly held in check by the other two branches.  Without a series of checks and balances, the president, congress, or the Supreme Court could take power and a representative democracy could turn slowly into a dictatorship or oligarchy.
858338
quick craificaton: democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on what to have for lunch. that's why we have a democratic republic. anarchy is how most of us live anyway. i wouldn't live any differently if the state or the feds went away ty for the good question.
901458
Local Legislatures Doing The Job \nThat The Federal Government Refuses To Do\n\nThis WILL Be The Spark That Lights The Fire\n\nI Think The Government At Local Levels \nSHOULD Be Given The Authority To Govern Their Jurisdictions\nWITHOUT Interference From The Federal Government\nIf They Don't Already Have It\n\nIt Is The VOTERS That Put These Representatives Into Office\nFor The Specific Reason \nOf REPRESENTING Their Voices In The Lawmaking Decisions\nOf Their Cities, Counties And States\n\nFor The Federal Government To DENY \nOr UNDERMINE The Ability \nOf The Cities, Counties And States \nTo Govern Their Jurisdictions\nIs Paramount To Saying That The Voices Of The People (Voters)\nWill Be IGNORED\n\nThis Is Unacceptable\n\n\n\n\n\n\nImposter\n\nPancha Go Home, Hobag
969831
The Constitution only has a few basic principals that are no-brainers.  It does not specifically preclude the "evil" governmental activity you indicate.  But thank God that it does prohbit British and Hessian soldiers from demanding to stay at my house.
202490
Read the Federalist Papers
752913
The Democratic-Republicans (anti-Federalists) believed in State's Rights.  They had the better view.
854688
Unfortunately, you completely misunderstand the problem.  Why is there corruption in all governments?  Because those in the governments have power!  The less power a government has, the less it will attract those who are power hungry.  Conversely, the more power a government has, the more it will attract those who are power hungry, and it is the most power hungry that are the most corrupt.  That is why the founding fathers, wisely, limited the power of our federal government severely.  Unfortunately, people have been more and more willing to give the government a bigger and bigger budget and more and more power, which attracts the very people we least need in such a position.  People continue, though I can't imagine why, to think that it is only a matter of "cleaning it up" to get a better situation.  The truth is that if the government was limited again to what it was supposed to be in 1790, there would be little motivation for the power hungry to take it over.  And, even if they did, it wouldn't matter anyway because of the severely limited power!  Talk about a win-win situation.   I think we are in for more of the same, unless the people finally say 'enough is enough,' and take away the unconstitutional powers of the government and the enormous budget they have.  Unfortunately people look at government as a benevolent big brother instead of the necessary evil our wise founders did.  Too bad, things will only get worse.
609086
Neither, I believe that the 2 party system of government has taken us to a point where lobbyists, insurance companies, and the ACLU are in charge because they represent an absurd amount of money and 10 to 20% of the people. Our elected officials lose track of why they ran for office as soon as someone starts throwing money around. Lobby ism should not be allowed and elected officials should be held more accountable to the people that put them there than they are to the entire populous. What's good for Texas is not ness. what's good for me in MI.
330309
youre wrong fusion. the freedom to govern & protect ourselves eliviates the need for federal protection. the fed is 200 years old, is the outcome good? no, we're high on everyones shltlist, our economy is based on variables rather than actual wealth (gold, silver, jewels, ect) http://www.philipdru.com/griffin_stream.html , we're constantly at war, tollerate obvious inhouse attrocities (waco), we're 28th in education globally, agh!!! to much to list. point is, aint workin out. if we all have the means to peotect ourselves the crazies will come out in mass, true. itll be anarchy, but very short lived (so to speak). the more we rely on the fed, proven, the worse off we are. name something the fed does better & more efficient than private enterprise. no way, give me freedom, i'll handle my own security. shlt, this side of town handles its own security now, cops dont come here without military trained swat.
588493
I assume you are European by your spelling so please refer yourself to a comparison between Federal and unitary systems as well as Prime Minister vs. Presidential models.\n\nbest
270231
How do you mean Dual?  Are you referring to State & Federal? or maybe Criminal & civil? or maybe Adult and Juvinial?\n\nAs you can see from evil incarnat it can be quite complicated.  Basicly our form of government has two reconize powers of Federal and State.  Which one is in charge of what is somewhat stated in the US Consitution unfortunatly there has been an on going tug a war of who controls what (What our Civil War was about).\nAnyhow things that are considered to be the States power of responsiblity is what State Courts rule on.  What Federal has power is what Federal Courts rule on for example any crime that occured in a National forest the Feds can claim, even if the National forest is in a State. \nIt's generally concidered worse to commit a Federal Offense then a state offense.  But in truth it's under state law your are tried for Murder, and a it's the State law that decides if you can be put to death for that Murder.\nBut most people convict to death will then appeal up through the system. And these appeals can go to the Federal Supreme court because of debated consititional issues involved with the death penalty.
696149
Back to the Middle America Democratic Party, after years of being infiltrated by Preppy scum who are just as unAmerican as their classmates on the Conservative side.  Since sissyhawks never protected our country the way we had to,  "protectionism" is a dirty word.  All they protect is the cheap-wage greed of the economic traitors.  \n\nGet this straight, rich thieves:  This is a democracy, not a republic.  We allow people to own businesses, provided that their selfish gain benefits us too.  We have eminent domain over all property on American territory, including cancelling their right to move our businesses overseas.