Until the Civil War, we commonly referred to ourselves as "These United States" and loyalty to state was more powerful than loyalty to America as a whole. In the early years of our country, transportation and communications were slow and difficult and the Federal Government was feeble and distant by modern standards. When seeking to create a stronger Federal Government, the Founders were very cognizant that the Union they were seeking to perfect was composed of sovereign states - states which were suspicions of ceding powers to the new Federal Government. The Tenth Amendment seems like an obvious restatement of the principles in the Constitution describing limited Federal Government (as the Supreme Court famously asserted). The fact that it was drafted at all arose from a fear that ultimately the states stood to lose power to the Federal Government. As it turns out, these fears were well grounded.
Since 1789, states rights have been steadily whittled away, circumscribed, limited and in some cases defined out of existence as one crisis after another led Americans to demand action by a stronger Federal government. Nullification, the Civil War, the Progressive Era, World War I, the New Deal, World War II and the Cold War marked significant milestones on the road to expanding federal powers at the expense of those customarily exercised by the states. The Commerce Clause in particular has been used to justify legislation, regulation and enforcement over a wide range of issues. Some of these such as gun control, growing home gardens or the personal use of medicinal cannabis would seem to be far removed from Congress's mandate to regulate interstate commerce.
Beginning in the 1980's - for the first time - the Supreme Court began to define the limits of federal encroachment on remaining states rights. In Nevada this was paralleled by grass-roots citizen action such as the Sagebrush Rebellion. The push-back continues to this day with parts of the Affordable Care Act being struck down in 2012 with reference to states rights.
While the national Modern Whig Party has no platform plank relating to the preservation of states rights there might be several sound reasons why this should be a concern to Nevadans:
- Political decisions made at the state or county level produce legislation and administration best tailored to Nevada's needs and conditions. Decisions made by a distant federal government in general do not.
- Concentration of power in any branch of government is a danger to our personal liberty. Much as the separation of federal powers built into our Constitution protects our liberty so too does the separation of powers between the Federal Government and the States. Preserving states rights and autonomy indirectly preserves our freedoms.
- The states serve as political incubators - devising solutions through trial and error to local problems. The results of these experiments are important guides to designing effective national legislation. The states led the way toward effective national welfare reform during the 1990's and are now devising changes to drug legislation and criminal sentencing to address pressing local social needs. Without the benefit of these experiments, Congress would be working in the dark, imposing one-size-fits-all legislation that in many cases wouldn't work.
What do you think? Should we have a plank in our state platform on this issue? If you think so, what should it look like?
- Mike Power
