English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

How much do most people think the federal government neads to do?
I, for one, think that it should be almost completly taken over at the state level. The USA is simply to large and diverse for a federal "one size fits all."
The federal government should only be in charge of the following:

Massive desaster relief (when a single state is overwhelmed)
Foreign Policy
Defense (including coast guard)
Defending Human Rights and the Constitution
Interstate Highways
International Borders

And absolutely NOTHING else! It could be accomplished far more efficiantly and effectively at the state level.

2006-07-07 15:15:56 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Government

8 answers

i think someone wrote all this down somewhere...

the constitution.

2006-07-07 15:18:55 · answer #1 · answered by more than a hat rack 4 · 0 0

Your proposal contradicts itself. You list the Constitution among your purposes; however, the Constitution itself prescribes a great many other purposes for which our government has been instituted -- purposes that go far beyond your proposals. Your suggestion seems to have been given some serious thought, though, and you could probably build some strong arguments in favor of permitting states great latitude within the federal system, vis a vis the federal government. I promise I don't mean it as a put-down when I recommend that you take a long, careful read through the Constitution itself to enrich your thinking further. Pay particular attention to Article I, which tells Congress what it can and can't do, Article IV, which describes the relation of the US government to the States, and the Amendments, many of which limit the power that the federal AND the State governments have over "we the people".

2006-07-07 15:26:57 · answer #2 · answered by BoredBookworm 5 · 0 0

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
What is the responsibility of the federal government?
How much do most people think the federal government neads to do?
I, for one, think that it should be almost completly taken over at the state level. The USA is simply to large and diverse for a federal "one size fits all."
The federal government should only be in charge of the...

2015-08-06 06:48:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The responsibility of the federal government must also include the following (plus your list):
Monetary regulation (who else will print and distribute money if not the feds?)

What about the supreme court? That needs federal status as they are the body supposedly protecting and upholding the constitution.

Then there is social security (not handled effectively by the Feds, presently) you would overwhelm the states, many of whom are currently overburdened with their "welfare state" status regarding medical coverage to the uninsured population.

I'm not sure that I wold want them to continue massive disaster relief - Katrina aftermath is still in chaos.

What about taxes to fund defense, foreign policy, defense of human rights and the constitution, interstate highways and international border patrols? Someone needs to handle that and the states are not set up to collect "new" taxes.
(Taxation should be on the purchase of all goods, except food, that way everyone would be taxed on what they choose to purchase and those with the bucks purchasing Caddies, BMW's and Mercedes and those purchasing used cars would be taxed accordingly...sorry that's a whole other issue).... taxes would have to be confronted and handled by the feds.

That is all that I can think of right now. Good luck in your search for utopia. :o)

2006-07-07 15:31:02 · answer #4 · answered by LUCIBEE 2 · 0 0

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/gPdvt

States are supposed to be in control of education spending. That includes all levels of public education, from preschool to universities. The line for funding of anything is really difficult to discern nowadays, since states apply for Federal grant money all the time and so many programs are partially funded by federal money. Even before No Child Left Behind, primary schools received funding from the Federal government. Usually it is up to the state governments, often in the constitution, to determine who decides how what money is spent. Everything from state law enforcement (troopers, state highway patrol) to NY state National Guard programs receive some amount of Federal funding and must abide by whatever terms of agreement exist for the use of those federal funds. Programs like Medicaid and Foodstamps are administered by states but largely funded by federal tax money. I might suggest that you look at the State Constitution of New York, but that will be tedious and boring, and like I said, so much of the state's funds come from the federal government with strings attached. State department heads and lower level officials ultimately decide how to use these funds but an argument could be made that without federal funds most states, especially New York, couldn't operate.

2016-04-01 02:14:34 · answer #5 · answered by Jeanne 4 · 0 0

I agree the federal government has grown too large. It is unmanageable. I would like to see a return to a much leaner federal government defending our constitutional rights rather than becoming a clearing house for benefits depending on political clout. Alas, freedom and liberty are being exchanged for equality and security. To top it all off, it's being engineered by a bunch of lawyers. The devil himself would be hard-pressed to come up with a scarier scenario.

2006-07-07 15:37:17 · answer #6 · answered by szydkids 5 · 0 0

Everything that you listed is about all that the fed is responsible for, you maybe missed education, which the feds send enormous amounts of money (way more than national defense, really - look it up) to the states. Everything else falls under the jurisdiction of each individual state according to the will of the voters there. Sure the supreme court rules on laws that may contradict the constitution but mostly, the states are in charge of their own soil.

2006-07-07 15:34:44 · answer #7 · answered by Rich H 2 · 0 0

Apparently you have an iron grip on what should be reality. Of course you realize you are pissing against the wind. OK we will do it together. Knowing full well that according to the majority this kind of thinking is not well taken. It is nice to know there are two who think it would be great.

2006-07-07 15:24:01 · answer #8 · answered by oscar 2 · 0 0

To attempt to produce more good than harm.

"I hope we have once again reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts." --Ronald Reagan

2006-07-07 15:19:06 · answer #9 · answered by JoeSchmoe06 4 · 0 0

Collect our hard earned money then screw us over. At least that is the role of the Govt. under Bush.

2006-07-07 15:18:12 · answer #10 · answered by Tony Danza 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers