I would dismiss this as a joke, but given the looniness we’ve seen grow on the issue of federal power it obviously is not a joke.
The this, in this case, is an amendment that would grant state legislatures the power to repeal federal law — two-thirds of all state legislatures would need to vote for repeal. It has the backing of folks in 12 states (the story says legislatures, including New Jersey, when it needs to be made clear that full legislatures are not on board in most cases) and some in Congress — which leaves me wondering if anyone is thinking clearly out there.
The amendment is being pushed as a way to trim federal sails and force national lawmakers to consider the impact of their actions on the states, which sounds logical in theory but would create chaos in practice and do little more than further empower small states and, more ominously, make progressive reform impossible.
As with the filibuster, the threat of a repeal vote might be enough to stall action — consider what might have happened to civil rights legislation had this been in effect in the mid-1960s. The reality is that the federal government has no choice but to step in sometimes — to address questions of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, to impose regulatory rules that can act as a baseline and so on.
Giving a veto to the states will create a downward pull on all of these issues, because there will be no incentive for states with the weakest environmental regulations, those with out workplace safety laws, without a minimum wage, etc., to improve, no minimum standards to meet, etc. States with effective laws will have little choice but to gut their own regulatory apparatus to keep business from fleeing to the states of least resistance.
This craziness, of course, is brought to you by the same people who believe that democracy would be enhanced by taking the right to vote for U.S. Senators away from the people and handing it to the very state legislatures that have proven inept and corrupt. (Does anyone really think that the people we send to Trenton would do a better job picking Senators than the voters? Does anyone think that the people in Trenton will be thinking of us and not of themselves?)
- Send me an e-mail.
- Read poetry at The Subterranean.
- Certainties and Uncertainties a chapbook by Hank Kalet, will be published in November by Finishing Line Press. It can be ordered here.
- Suburban Pastoral, a chapbook by Hank Kalet, available here.
Hank Kalet 
So how do YOU prevent \”unfunded mandates\”?The Dead Old White Guys HATE democracy as \”mob rule\”. And, we are PROVING them correct. The Seventeenth Amendment killed the feedback loop from Trenton to DC. Will the Trenton crooks pick better crooks that the bosses do for \”We, The Sheeple\” in Nu Jerzee to rubber stamp?I bet yes. For only one reason, Trenton Crook wpuld pick someone to go to DC and make sure that (1) they were no unfunded mandates; (2) they \”get\” as much as they \”give\”; and (3) conduct that causes \”We, The Sheeple\” to get upset (more) with Trenton is not tolerated. Sorry, but you \”Secular Progressive Socialists\” have to remember the words of the Iron Lady! \”The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.\” –Margaret ThatcherThe States' \”veto\” is just trying to de facto repeal the Seventeenth.
The Iron Lady was very unpopular and on the way out. It was the waging of war in the Falklands that saved her ass. She privatized and destroyed the UK version of Social Security, that was a disaster. She was a big buddy of the fascist dictator Pinochet who was the hero of the libertarian economists. Libertarianism is always just a few baby steps away from fascism. Their love of Pinochet exposed the libertarians for the fraud, fakes and phonies that they truly are. Libertarians of course hate democracy because they hate the idea of ordinary people having any political power or of having any say in our government. America is a representative democracy or a democratic republic.Having state legislatures and governors select the US senators proved to be an unmitigated disaster, that's why the 17th amendment was enacted.
The states already have a repeal method, it's called the United States Congress and it belongs to the citizens themselves. This feels like another way to insert manipulation at a level where ideology can trump the wishes of the people. Instead of pulling apart, why not focus on a rule to reform the filibuster, which would vastly improve the functioning of the Senate.
From the NY Times:\”The idea has been propelled by the wave of Republican victories in the midterm elections. First promoted by Virginia lawmakers and Tea Party groups, it has the support of legislative leaders in 12 states. It also won the backing of the incoming House majority leader, Representative Eric Cantor, when it was introduced this month in Congress. Like any constitutional amendment, it faces enormous hurdles: it must be approved by both chambers of Congress — requiring them to agree, in this case, to check their own power — and then by three-quarters of, or 38, state legislatures.\”It has no chance of passing, it's just political theater for gullible right wing sheeple and libertarian sheeple.
SO how do YOU prevent \”unfunded mandates\”?
Another disaster was Thatcher's privatization of UK railroads. Operations of the railroads became more expensive, less reliable and the quality of service plummeted.There were a whole series of railway disasters caused by people cutting corners to save costs, to make more profits. There were delays that would make people's hair stand on end; people in the depths of winter being delayed 5, 7 hours on railway journeys, and rolling stock which has not improved since the public sector days. Huge state subsidies go to private owners who are putting it in their pockets. As a result of the privatization, corners were cut to lower costs and, as a result, there were terrible accidents and people did die.