High: 84°F ~ Low: 52°F
Saturday, May 25, 2013
How far should state's rights go?Posted Wednesday, March 31, 2010, at 2:40 PM
From a press release issued today by Lt. Gov. (and candidate) Ron Ramsey's office about a proposed state law:
"The Tennessee Health Freedom Act would protect a citizen's right to not participate in a healthcare system and would prohibit the federal government from imposing fines on that person's decision...The federal government must be reined in."
What this refers to is the sometimes-controversial issue of states' rights.
And "state's rights" goes beyond just health care. How much control, from the point of view of persons not absorbed with one heated, temporary issue or political party, should the federal government have in the 21st century?
I'd hate to think what shape our country would be in without, for example, a centrally-controlled military or regulatory agencies.
But I'm not sold on the idea that federal laws should supercede state laws in all cases. Seems like states should self-govern as much as possible, with the federal government having the right to step in if state laws are abusive or unfair, such as legal slavery in the 1800s.
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]
David Melson is a copy editor and staff writer for the Times-Gazette.
Hot topicsPicturing the Past 184: Hootenanny lineup
(8 ~ 9:36 AM, May 24)
Picturing the Past 92: Stopping by Parks-Belk
"Ag-gag" bill full of problems
Picturing the Past 183: Square in 1965
Speeding drivers on the loose