41 ms·

More and more we see state agencies standing up to regime change in Washington (ex: CA and environmental regulations). Regardless of your personal politics, I w

More and more we see state agencies standing up to regime change in Washington (ex: CA and environmental regulations). Regardless of your personal politics, I wonder how this dynamic will affect democracy in the US.

angersock 9y ago
The issue of federalism is not the settled matter that most people seem to be thinking it is.
- erikpukinskis 9y ago
  Which way do you think most people think it has settled on?
creaghpatr 9y ago
Well up until election 2016, Democrats were vehemently opposed to states authority, and concentrated far more power in Washington during the Obama administration. It's nice to see them coming around.
- swang 9y ago
  (not) surprisingly, republicans have all but disappeared from that chat. at the federal level, both parties only care about state rights when it suits them.
  - gfodor 9y ago
    This is true for about every facet of the Constitution.
  - creaghpatr 9y ago
    Gun laws, abortion, the trans bathroom thing in NC...all recent issues that the GOP sided on states rights vs. federal regs On healthcare policy in particular the state specific policies continue to be enforced by the GOP. These aren’t positions I agree with btw I’m just pointing out recent examples. I think it’s fair to say Democrats would rather have centralized healthcare, gun laws, lgbt policies, and abortion access, rather than leaving it to the states to decide.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > Gun laws, abortion, the trans bathroom thing in NC...all recent issues that the GOP sided on states rights vs. federal regs Nope, they aren't. They are all areas where the GOP has pushed at both the federal and state level in the same direction, caring about policy (excluding transgendered persons from general society, blocking abortion, and protecting individual firearms rights) not the relative balance of state/federal power. * Republicans vigorously oppose gun control and the state level, even suing state governments in federal court to overturn regulations. * Republicans fight for LGBT discrimination in law and regulation at all levels, not for freedom of states to set inclusive or exclusive policies. * And, abortion, well: https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/353709-house-passes-20-week-abortion-ban%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/353...
      - creaghpatr 9y ago
        They aren't mutually exclusive of course. Obviously both parties are going to fight at all levels but in recent history GOP controls far more of state governments than Democrats so they strategically favor states rights. My original point is still that they haven't shifted away from that strategic view of states rights since the election because they still hold those advantages. When Democrats dominate at state level I'd expect the poles to shift but that has not happened yet.
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        > Obviously both parties are going to fight at all levels but in recent history GOP controls far more of state governments than Democrats so they strategically favor states rights. No, they tactically see success on certain issues operating at the state level; they don't, strategically or otherwise support states rights (that is, any consistent protected domains where states are free to act as they will without federal interference.) They do like, since the adoption of the Southern Strategy, to use the phrase “States Rights”, but that's a 150+-year-old American political code for “we support and demand systematic oppression of blacks”, not a position on the relative distribution of power between the federal and state government.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Democrats were vehemently opposed to states authority No, they weren't. Neither Democrats nor Republicans, on the whole, have a strong general position one way or the other on the balance of federal vs. state power. Republicans like to invoke the phrase “states rights” around issues where they disagree with the current federal policy and project a strong centralizing position onto Democrats on those issues, but both tend to act more on issues that state/federal preference, acting at whatever level they have the present influence to act, and Democrats aren't even particularly prone to pretending a strong preference either way. (They'll often cite a practical need to act at one level because of a failure at the other level, but that's different than even a for-show ideological preference.)
- kadenshep 9y ago
  >Democrats were vehemently opposed to states authority No they weren't. This is a total lie. I'd call it a mis-characterization but it's been beaten down so much that you have to be purposefully lying at this point to keep repeating it.
  - creaghpatr 9y ago
    Is that your argument?
    - kadenshep 9y ago
      I don't know why you'd call it an argument. It's a statement referencing a matter of fact. It's a lie.
    - erikpukinskis 9y ago
      A bald assertion on the internet need only be met with another bald assertion. If you want someone to argue with you, you need to present an argument first.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
cryoshon 9y ago
centrifugal forces affect countries by tearing them into pieces; the number of pieces depends on how long you run the centrifuge and at what speed. the US has long been subject to many centrifugal forces, one of which was the tension between state and federal bodies of government. trump has accelerated the centrifuge's rate of rotation past safely sustainable speeds.

angersock 9y ago

The issue of federalism is not the settled matter that most people seem to be thinking it is.

erikpukinskis 9y ago
Which way do you think most people think it has settled on?

creaghpatr 9y ago

Well up until election 2016, Democrats were vehemently opposed to states authority, and concentrated far more power in Washington during the Obama administration. It's nice to see them coming around.

swang 9y ago
(not) surprisingly, republicans have all but disappeared from that chat. at the federal level, both parties only care about state rights when it suits them.
- gfodor 9y ago
  This is true for about every facet of the Constitution.
- creaghpatr 9y ago
  Gun laws, abortion, the trans bathroom thing in NC...all recent issues that the GOP sided on states rights vs. federal regs On healthcare policy in particular the state specific policies continue to be enforced by the GOP. These aren’t positions I agree with btw I’m just pointing out recent examples. I think it’s fair to say Democrats would rather have centralized healthcare, gun laws, lgbt policies, and abortion access, rather than leaving it to the states to decide.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Gun laws, abortion, the trans bathroom thing in NC...all recent issues that the GOP sided on states rights vs. federal regs Nope, they aren't. They are all areas where the GOP has pushed at both the federal and state level in the same direction, caring about policy (excluding transgendered persons from general society, blocking abortion, and protecting individual firearms rights) not the relative balance of state/federal power. * Republicans vigorously oppose gun control and the state level, even suing state governments in federal court to overturn regulations. * Republicans fight for LGBT discrimination in law and regulation at all levels, not for freedom of states to set inclusive or exclusive policies. * And, abortion, well: https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/353709-house-passes-20-week-abortion-ban%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/353...
    - creaghpatr 9y ago
      They aren't mutually exclusive of course. Obviously both parties are going to fight at all levels but in recent history GOP controls far more of state governments than Democrats so they strategically favor states rights. My original point is still that they haven't shifted away from that strategic view of states rights since the election because they still hold those advantages. When Democrats dominate at state level I'd expect the poles to shift but that has not happened yet.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > Obviously both parties are going to fight at all levels but in recent history GOP controls far more of state governments than Democrats so they strategically favor states rights. No, they tactically see success on certain issues operating at the state level; they don't, strategically or otherwise support states rights (that is, any consistent protected domains where states are free to act as they will without federal interference.) They do like, since the adoption of the Southern Strategy, to use the phrase “States Rights”, but that's a 150+-year-old American political code for “we support and demand systematic oppression of blacks”, not a position on the relative distribution of power between the federal and state government.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Democrats were vehemently opposed to states authority No, they weren't. Neither Democrats nor Republicans, on the whole, have a strong general position one way or the other on the balance of federal vs. state power. Republicans like to invoke the phrase “states rights” around issues where they disagree with the current federal policy and project a strong centralizing position onto Democrats on those issues, but both tend to act more on issues that state/federal preference, acting at whatever level they have the present influence to act, and Democrats aren't even particularly prone to pretending a strong preference either way. (They'll often cite a practical need to act at one level because of a failure at the other level, but that's different than even a for-show ideological preference.)
kadenshep 9y ago
>Democrats were vehemently opposed to states authority No they weren't. This is a total lie. I'd call it a mis-characterization but it's been beaten down so much that you have to be purposefully lying at this point to keep repeating it.
- creaghpatr 9y ago
  Is that your argument?
  - kadenshep 9y ago
    I don't know why you'd call it an argument. It's a statement referencing a matter of fact. It's a lie.
  - erikpukinskis 9y ago
    A bald assertion on the internet need only be met with another bald assertion. If you want someone to argue with you, you need to present an argument first.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

cryoshon 9y ago

centrifugal forces affect countries by tearing them into pieces; the number of pieces depends on how long you run the centrifuge and at what speed. the US has long been subject to many centrifugal forces, one of which was the tension between state and federal bodies of government. trump has accelerated the centrifuge's rate of rotation past safely sustainable speeds.