I would like to see every State adopt the exact same Rules & Laws so that everything is Universal across each state.
2 Likes
Some laws like traffic laws should be the same in all states to provide safety. Where this universal state law idea fails is that actually eliminates state differences. That is particularly noteworthy on hot topic issues like abortion or high capacity magazines.
6 Likes
Traffic laws, maybe, but I disagree with all. I believe the reason we have states is so that you can chose the laws and regulations you want to live by. You like abortions, move to California, Minnesota, or Maine. You appose abortion, move to Idaho, South Dakota, or Mississippi. Same thing for marijuana, you like it, California, Michigan or Colorado is where you might want to be. Don’t like it, Texas, Kentucky, or Tennessee is for you.
3 Likes
This is exactly why we are the United States of America and not just America. At the time of the founding, no state wanted to govern the same as every other state. It is what make us unique and able to have our freedoms. If every state had the same rules and laws then it would remove the need for all local and state government, and we would be left with only federal government and nobody that could challenge it. That could be a very dangerous road to travel down.
6 Likes
How would this be different than Federal law?
3 Likes
Our Federal Government does not have the skill set to develop consistent laws even across the domain of Federal regulations, much less across the domains of all 50 states.
For example, the US EPA specifies that water bodies you swim in can only contain cyanide levels of 22 parts per billion, while the water you drink can contain total cyanide of up to 200 parts per billion. The water quality community of experts in the states have ridiculed this Federal ruling (you can drink it but you can’t swim in it) for decades, but cannot get the US EPA to revise the rules.
We don’t need a bunch of beltway busy bodies making rules for the rest of us. They need to stay in their own lane.
3 Likes
No, each state is different and has different needs. For example, states that have hurricanes have some statutes about building homes that can survive 100mph winds. States in the north have requirements on insulating homes and snow removal that is not necessary in southern states. It is important to have LESS federal govenment control on things that can and should be handled locally, or on the state level.
3 Likes
This could be good for those issues affecting ALL states. For example, Presidential and Congressional elections should be regulated at the national level. All states should require photo ID and nationality recognized proof of citizenship in order to vote in such elections. There should also be nationally standardized timeframes for acceptance of absentee ballots, mail-in ballots and voter registration. (Provisional ballots should be discontinued.) There should be nationally standardized methods of ballot counting and auditing.
This is pure federalization and centralization. Anyone who supports this, does not support a Union of the Several States under a Constitutional Republic.
1 Like
This is what amendments to the Constitution are for.
Yes. Constitutional amendment, if needed, for standardization and regulation of elections for NATIONAL offices. That’s the only federalization I was referencing. Others may be over reach.
I’d say some form of election standardization could be on the table, but that’s not what your proposal implies.
At a convention of the States such standardization could be imposed once agreed upon.
I’m not the author of the “universal” laws proposal. The only universal I’m advocating is for Presidential and Congressional elections.
Oh! My bad sorry.
Can’t read or sumthing
That’s ok! So very glad we have this forum to share ideas!
1 Like