Given the constitution does the national government have a better chance of increasing its power? Why?

Answer 1

Only under current interpretations. Not as written.

As written, the Constitution intended the federal government to be a limited government of enumerated powers. That's the plain text. But two things went wrong.

First, in the early 1800s, the Supreme Court came up with the bizarre interpretation that "necessary and proper" actually meant "all appropriate means which are conducive or adapted to the end to be accomplished". In other words, they created the concept of rational basis review, allowing laws with any tenuous connection to the stated goals to be enacted.

This expanded the authority of Congress far beyond the plain text, and likely far beyond the original intent. But, for a time, that was still limited by the 10th Amendment, until the early 1900s, when that limitation was gutted, allowing the federal government to expand virtually unchecked.

Answer 2

i think in spite of the constitution the national gov't can increase it's power. look at how much this administration is shoring up the power of the executive branch. bush has used over 700 signing statements--more than all previous presidents combined. he's used this to pass laws as he sees fit. the line item veto was declared unconstitutional but this is a way around it. even when told they are breaking the law (wire taps, torture) they still continue on in whatever manner they see fit.
like bush says, 'the constitution is just a piece of paper'. that's about how much respect they have for the law of this land.

Answer 3

yes. why...? i don't have the time to go into that.