What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Federal Government needs to be put back on its Constitutional leash.

gmeyers1944

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Messages
769
Reaction score
551
Points
918
Location
Westfield, NY (near Buffalo)
I buy products, the most recent is a can of Off Insect Repellent. The first statement of "Directions For Use" states " It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling" I always read the labels to see how to use the product safely. The Federal government has gone far beyond its authority to make such laws. One thing that would help is to make agencies advisory. If the Environmental Protection Agency decides that something needs to be done, they should advise Congress so a law can be proposed to solve whatever problem they see. They should not just go off and implement policies that have not been made law by Congress. That is what Congress is for.
 

Ralph Norton

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2022
Messages
1,500
Reaction score
1,560
Points
1,893
I buy products, the most recent is a can of Off Insect Repellent. The first statement of "Directions For Use" states " It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling" I always read the labels to see how to use the product safely. The Federal government has gone far beyond its authority to make such laws. One thing that would help is to make agencies advisory. If the Environmental Protection Agency decides that something needs to be done, they should advise Congress so a law can be proposed to solve whatever problem they see. They should not just go off and implement policies that have not been made law by Congress. That is what Congress is for.
Apparently the Supreme Court agrees with you.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
101,281
Reaction score
12,371
Points
2,210
Location
Michigan
I buy products, the most recent is a can of Off Insect Repellent. The first statement of "Directions For Use" states " It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling" I always read the labels to see how to use the product safely. The Federal government has gone far beyond its authority to make such laws. One thing that would help is to make agencies advisory. If the Environmental Protection Agency decides that something needs to be done, they should advise Congress so a law can be proposed to solve whatever problem they see. They should not just go off and implement policies that have not been made law by Congress. That is what Congress is for.
Like I said in another thread. Soon everything Republicans don't like will be unconstitional. They are legislating from the bench just like they complained and said we did in the 2000's.

Abortion, unconstitutional. What's next? Unions, gun laws, gay marriage, affirmative action, the EPA.

Anything I missed?
 
OP
gmeyers1944

gmeyers1944

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Messages
769
Reaction score
551
Points
918
Location
Westfield, NY (near Buffalo)
Like I said in another thread. Soon everything Republicans don't like will be unconstitional. They are legislating from the bench just like they complained and said we did in the 2000's.

Abortion, unconstitutional. What's next? Unions, gun laws, gay marriage, affirmative action, the EPA.

Anything I missed?
SCOTUS did not say that abortion is unconstitutional. It stated that abortion is not a Federal issue. It just returned abortion rights to where they belong, at the state level.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
101,281
Reaction score
12,371
Points
2,210
Location
Michigan
SCOTUS did not say that abortion is unconstitutional. It stated that abortion is not a Federal issue. It just returned abortion rights to where they belong, at the state level.
Whatever. It's unconstitutional. The founders never mentioned abortion, so it's unconstitutional.

They limit the EPA's power on fighting climate change. Unconstitutional.

They said NY's gun law was unconstitutional.

Soon social security, medicare and Obamacare will all be unconstitutional.
 

there4eyeM

unlicensed metaphysician
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
18,245
Reaction score
3,829
Points
280

The Federal Government needs to be put back on its Constitutional leash.​

And the Constitution has a political revolution every two years built into it. Voters have the potential to clear out the House and a third of the Senate bi-annually. Put in candidates who have one issue, the changes necessary to the Constitution.
 

Friends

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
431
Points
130
The United States Constitution was written and signed by rich white men who wished to keep power in the hands of rich white men. The Constitution has lasted as long as it has because interpretations have changed in response to changes in popular opinion.

Is the Constitution a "living document?" That depends on how "living document" is defined. I am opposed to the United States Supreme Court inventing rights that were not intended by the original authors and which are unpopular at the time of their invention. The right of blacks to attend integrated schools was one of these rights. The right to an abortion is another of these rights.

My interpretation of the Constitution is fairly simple: unless the Constitution clearly says something, We should assume that the Constitution is silent on the matter, and leave it up to the voters.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
81,745
Reaction score
35,476
Points
2,290

Friends

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
431
Points
130
Whatever. It's unconstitutional. The founders never mentioned abortion, so it's unconstitutional.

They limit the EPA's power on fighting climate change. Unconstitutional.

They said NY's gun law was unconstitutional.

Soon social security, medicare and Obamacare will all be unconstitutional.
The Constitution does not mention abortion, EPA's power to fight climate change, Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare, so it leaves them up to the voters.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
81,745
Reaction score
35,476
Points
2,290
We should assume that the Constitution is silent on the matter
Actually, that is addressed in the Constitution. Anything else is left up to the States.
That is worded very clearly.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
81,745
Reaction score
35,476
Points
2,290
The Constitution does not mention abortion, EPA's power to fight climate change, Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare, so it leaves them up to the voters.
Nope. You should try reading it sometime.
 

there4eyeM

unlicensed metaphysician
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
18,245
Reaction score
3,829
Points
280
Whatever. It's unconstitutional. The founders never mentioned abortion, so it's unconstitutional.

They limit the EPA's power on fighting climate change. Unconstitutional.

They said NY's gun law was unconstitutional.

Soon social security, medicare and Obamacare will all be unconstitutional.
Why not? In for a penny...
Anyway, amendments can still be made, and those are made by voters.
 

Friends

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
431
Points
130
Actually, that is addressed in the Constitution. Anything else is left up to the States.
That is worded very clearly.
This is the Tenth Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

The Supreme Court has had the good sense to ignore the Tenth Amendment. A reactionary Supreme Court could use the Tenth Amendment to overturn much of the popular legislation passed since the inauguration of Teddy Roosevelt in 1902. If it did there would be a Constitutional crises leading to end or the weakening of the Supreme Court.

There might be a completely new United States Constitution, one giving the federal government much more power.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
81,745
Reaction score
35,476
Points
2,290
This is the Tenth Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

The Supreme Court has had the good sense to ignore the Tenth Amendment. A reactionary Supreme Court could use the Tenth Amendment to overturn much of the popular legislation passed since the inauguration of Teddy Roosevelt in 1902. If it did there would be a Constitutional crises leading to end or the weakening of the Supreme Court.
Most of the popular legislation is unconstitutional.
They made an amendment process. If something is that popular, it should pass so that the fed gov ACTUALLY has the power it is legislating itself.
 

Friends

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
431
Points
130
The United States Constitution has lasted as long as it has because it has not been regarded as a leash on the government, but a loose guideline on how to operate a representative democracy.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
101,281
Reaction score
12,371
Points
2,210
Location
Michigan
Nope. You should try reading it sometime.
That seems to be a right wing talking point. My politician buddy who now has to defend pro life (when he was always pro choice), is now telling us that we need to read the constitution.

Ha! As if you idiots have. And even if you have, you are interpreting it weird. You are reading it like radical right wing nutjobs.

Ok then. We'll try it your way for awhile. See how it works out. You just killed a bunch of woman to save some seeds. Creeps.
 

Friends

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
431
Points
130
Most of the popular legislation is unconstitutional.
They made an amendment process. If something is that popular, it should pass so that the fed gov ACTUALLY has the power it is legislating itself.
The amendment process is too slow to respond to the popular will. The government has grown to its present size in response to popular demand. Every item in the domestic budget has a powerful constituency to protect it. The largest and most expensive spending programs are the most popular.

I lack reverence for the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, as long as the electorate is polarized I think it would be unwise to change or replace it. The electorate is gradually moving to the left. As soon as there is a general consensus on what the government should do and not do, I would welcome a Second Constitutional Convention.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
81,745
Reaction score
35,476
Points
2,290
The amendment process is too slow to respond to the popular will. The government has grown to its present size in response to popular demand. Every item in the domestic budget has a powerful constituency to protect it. The largest and most expensive spending programs are the most popular.

I lack reverence for the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, as long as the electorate is polarized I think it would be unwise to change or replace it. The electorate is gradually moving to the left. As soon as there is a general consensus on what the government should do and not do, I would welcome a Second Constitutional Convention.
Correct. Most Americans are statists. Have been for generations. That doesnt mean its right.
There should be NO shortcuts for a centralized government. Do people not know our(human) history?
Goddamn, our Founders died in vain.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$0.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top