Posted on Feb 21, 2018
If you had the power to enact federal policy, what would you do, why would you do it, and what would the ultimate goal be?
17.8K
232
155
44
44
0
Government
Policy
Law
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 31
33
33
0
To sunset every federal department, agency, bureau, etc not specifically authorized by the Constitution. Organizations such as the US Department of Education, et al not only usurp powers reserved for the States, but also detract from the proper functions of the federal government
(33)
(0)
Susan Foster
Sgt Ronald Paden - Civil rights such as special needs students, racial disparities, LGBGT students, unfair lending practices for college loans, to name a few. They are out there, and Congress isn't charged with ensuring they are followed. They just say what they are.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Ronald Paden
Thanks for clarifying, Congress makes the laws and the Justice Department enforces those laws. The civil rights are for all people it has nothing to do with education. Again we don’t need a bloated bureaucracy in DC telling the States ‘how to’ in every way to teach and raise our children. We definitely need standards but not by a bloated federal bureaucracy. ie School systems have nutritionist on staff they can provide a meal the children will it and it is nutritious. We don’t need our children not liking and then throwing their food away.
(0)
(0)
Lisa Fiedler
Something that may never happen, but should, is creating term limits for Congress (recognize that term limits for POTUS didn't come around until the early 1900s because of an overreaching president). That said, I agree that we need to roll back to the fundamentals of The Constitution of the United States and The Bill of Rights. Everything else, as stated in the BoR, is up to the individual states.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Lisa Fiedler - early? The 22nd amendment was approved by Congress in 1947 and finally ratified in 1951.
Also, let’s not go crazy with the “if it’s not in the Constitution, it’s up to the states only” line of thinking. That shows a lack of understanding of the Constitution and how it’s historically been interpreted by the Supreme Court.
I’d recommend you familiarize yourself with Article 1, section 8. Specifically, the “Necessary and Proper clause”. Furthermore, read up on McCulloch v Maryland (1819). Chief Justice Marshall opined that listing ALL of Congress's powers, “would partake of a prolixity of a legal code and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind". The clause has since been broadly interpreted, and used as the constitutional foundational for an increiblely vast amount of federal laws.
Also, you say we should roll back to the Constitution and the bill of rights. You’re aware that they’re a part of the same document, yes? The Bill of Rights are simply the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. And why roll back to just the Bill of rights? Do amendments 11-27 not count? They are as constitutionally (because they’re all just amendments to the Constitution) valid as 1-10. The 11th amendment was ratified only 3 or 4 years after the 10th.
Thoughts?
Also, let’s not go crazy with the “if it’s not in the Constitution, it’s up to the states only” line of thinking. That shows a lack of understanding of the Constitution and how it’s historically been interpreted by the Supreme Court.
I’d recommend you familiarize yourself with Article 1, section 8. Specifically, the “Necessary and Proper clause”. Furthermore, read up on McCulloch v Maryland (1819). Chief Justice Marshall opined that listing ALL of Congress's powers, “would partake of a prolixity of a legal code and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind". The clause has since been broadly interpreted, and used as the constitutional foundational for an increiblely vast amount of federal laws.
Also, you say we should roll back to the Constitution and the bill of rights. You’re aware that they’re a part of the same document, yes? The Bill of Rights are simply the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. And why roll back to just the Bill of rights? Do amendments 11-27 not count? They are as constitutionally (because they’re all just amendments to the Constitution) valid as 1-10. The 11th amendment was ratified only 3 or 4 years after the 10th.
Thoughts?
(0)
(0)
18
18
0
Restructure our Congressional and POTUS election system. Term limits where they apply, outlaw lobbyists totally, abolish any campaign contributions made anonymously by loopholes or law (super pacs, Citizens United etc). Not one dollar should be contributed to any campaign that cannot be associated with an individual person or corporation, and there should be reasonable limits for both categories. Make voting mandatory and verification of eligibility universal and easier. Register to vote when registering for Selective Service. Voting should be a requirement of citizenship like the draft, taxes, jury duty etc. Goal is to put the power back in the hands of the voters instead of big money and special interest groups. This because currently the wants and needs of the 99% are secondary to that of the elected officials and the 1% that finance their staying in office.
(18)
(0)
Sgt Ronald Paden
The Electoral College is still the best system there is.
You can’t force people to vote.
Registration when you sign up for selective service won’t work because us old people don’t sign up for S.S.
And you will never get term limits with out an Article V Convention of States
You can’t force people to vote.
Registration when you sign up for selective service won’t work because us old people don’t sign up for S.S.
And you will never get term limits with out an Article V Convention of States
(0)
(0)
SFC Bill Snyder
IMO, the Electoral College is a must. It saved us from a Government elected by a handful of Progressive States and the endless slide to Socialism and distruction of the Country.
(1)
(0)
13
13
0
Oh WOW! For starters, Get rid of many of the regulations, decrease government “footprint”, keeping it within Constitutional bounds. Return much of the powers the States once had, fiscal responsibility, balanced budget, strictly control and-or “eradicate” parasites and abusers of “the system”, educate the citizenry with accurate US/World/Constitutional History, teach our citizenship/civic responsibility, border/drug control, discourage apathy and “entitlements”, emphasize the US as a “melting pot” (one “official” language), encourage LEGAL immigration, emphasizing their positive contributions, rather than “freebies” and welfare abuse. Oppose all groups that want to “take down” our Constitutional Republic, outlaw “sharia law” as a tool working against our system of law.
Strong military without the waste and abuse, remake the IRS and the tax code, Remake prisons and require strict interpretation of the Constitution for the legal system (firing abusers). Recognize “political correctness” for what it REALLY is - a “club” for secular humanism. Encourage free speech with responsibility for truth and accuracy. Chastise the main stream media HARD for their obvious bias and “spin”. I could go on and on.... but I’m totally out of breath. Thanks for the post. Do I really think we’ll ever see these things? Nah! But I CAN dream still..... like, build a rocket to send a few million hard core radicals to try their poison out on another planet. :)
Strong military without the waste and abuse, remake the IRS and the tax code, Remake prisons and require strict interpretation of the Constitution for the legal system (firing abusers). Recognize “political correctness” for what it REALLY is - a “club” for secular humanism. Encourage free speech with responsibility for truth and accuracy. Chastise the main stream media HARD for their obvious bias and “spin”. I could go on and on.... but I’m totally out of breath. Thanks for the post. Do I really think we’ll ever see these things? Nah! But I CAN dream still..... like, build a rocket to send a few million hard core radicals to try their poison out on another planet. :)
(13)
(0)
Sgt Ronald Paden
You can believe who ever you want to. There is fact in what I say. I was in Irving Texas and saw (FOR MY SELF) sharia law being administered. As I said before they
‘TRIED’ to get it put it into secular law they weren’t successful but the imams still put it into place in the community.
‘TRIED’ to get it put it into secular law they weren’t successful but the imams still put it into place in the community.
(1)
(0)
CW5 John M.
Sgt Ronald Paden - Also, when you hear of so-called “honor killings” (or maimings)? That is part of the Sharia law brought into Western countries. Young Muslim girls have suffered in the US, though not as much as Europe - YET. IMHO, we need to stay proactive on this travesty. We sure don’t need it here.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
CW5 John M.
SN K Walling - Political correctness (PC) is a term used in lieu of some other term that enforces the practice of a set of secular rules - morals without God. To the extent that PC tries to force people to operate within its rules - secular rules, it is like a "club" against other belief systems - oft used to silence debate or disagreement - especially as it gains prominence (dominance) in a society. Put simply, PC is an "enforcement arm" of secular humanism. The US has become a secularist-dominated society, hence the rise and growing importance of PC - morals without God. At least that is my take - as an erstwhile atheist and humanist.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google