4 ms·

I'll point out that the parent comment was specifically targeted at federal government and not government as a concept. Many of your arguments may still hold tr

I'll point out that the parent comment was specifically targeted at federal government and not government as a concept. Many of your arguments may still hold true but at least some can be reasonably painted as responsibilities for state governments, not Washington. That was presumably the desired (tired, 200-year-old) sentiment.

entee 11y ago
Possibly, but particularly for interstate issues it's hard to see how that works. And even where it does, it's usually slow and difficult to scale. The first thing that comes to mind is environmental issues. These have national implications that it's hard to see how even coalitions of states can have the same kind of impact. And if they did, you'd end up with a patchwork of regulations that makes it harder for business to work. I'm a proponent of relatively stronger central government, but I know that's not a universal belief. After all, the national government is a coalition of all the states :)