STATES RIGHTS DIVIDE US

Joe Scarborough seems to fancy him self as a modal for other conservatives to emulated. In that vain, this morning he came up with a principle of governance, as it should be in the Untied States. Our 50 states are like a huge laboratory in which each state tries a different approach to solve the same problem. That, he said, is federalism. Massachusetts solved their problem of health care in a good way for that state but not be good for another state.  Therefore, each state should find a solution. This is fundamentally the states rights mantra of certain elements in the Republican Party. It is the words “certain elements” that I want to address.

Rather than health care, think in terms of education, race relations, energy policy or even war. Way back during the Second World War, the states on the west coast were determined to make Japan the principle enemy whole those on the east coast it was the Germans who were the principle enemy. The Federation of States considered them both the enemy and directed the war accordingly.  Huge oil and gas companies have twisted states rights to benefit them selves. For example, Texas, Alaska, and recently North Dakota want economic independence from the other states because they do not want to share the wealth. They do not want to be part of the Federation. Consider race relations. What would this country look like if the states independently chose to either integrate or segregate? Do we want one common people or two separate but equal people; the decision that put Lincoln’s face on Mount Rushmore. Think about public education verses private decided on a state-by-state basis. Everyone wants their children educated but most people do not want to pay to educate other people’s children.  On a state-by-state basis, a rich state could afford to education other peoples children while a poor state could not afford that luxury, which would create a huge imbalance in the “American Dream”.  Some States could decide that children from poor neighborhoods did not deserve good schools or even schools of any description. Church members could decide those from other moral groups do not deserve public; therefore, they would not pay taxes to educated them but want the tax money to educate their children, which gave rise to the voucher system.

Yes, Joe, it is a conservative principle you espouse but it is wrong. Read the above paragraph and ask, would giving States the right to be independent serve to unite us or divide us. It is my contention that this conservative principle would fragment us and not unite us. But, isn’t that what I have been blogging about all this time (Firetereeblogspot) . We do not teach our children to be greedy and selfish but unfortunately, they often vote that way—look at the red state blue state electoral map.