Do you believe our country is stronger and better when it consists of a diverse group of states with their own unique laws, or when Federal laws gradually make all states operate more and more alike?
The articles of confederation vs. the constitution
This is interesting because democrats usually praise diversity until this question comes along.
State rule is my vote. Side note: I think if this question was written more fairly, there would be a LOT more votes for Federal rule... Obviously written by a state-ist.
I think the majority of both Democrats and Republicans would choose Federal rule, in fact.
I think you're wrong. I think it could have been a lot more "State-ist" like this...The Federal Gov shut down recently for nearly three weeks and has a debt over $16,000,000,000,000.00 do you think it should be more accountable?
We are a REPUBLIC of 50 semi-sovereign states, NOT a democracy. The states can do whatever they want as long as the Constitution does not explicitly forbid it.
I want to be governed by other Iowans, not other Americans.
You have to have diversity or everything just gets boring and stale
As opposed to the occasional civil war.
Love this question! Diversity!
There are a lot of laws that must be the same across the board (murder, rape, common sense laws) but there are a broader range of things states should be allowed to decide for themselves.
Making every state identical will work as well as the EU. I feel bad for Germany, supporting laggards beggar. And the Brits are happy they kept their own currency!
Apparently democrats only like diversity of skin color, but not diversity of ideas
ideas, laws, let's lump those together to make a point.
It's called the American "Experiment" for a reason. States are the testing grounds for policies. Look at Wisconsin's welfare reform, varied gun and tax laws, gay marriage, immigration adherence. Some winners, some losers.
I'm just on the fence today-
Kidnapping your own kids
Are two that absolutely should be wired federally.
All the people advocating for making child molestation legal in certain states are going to be pissed at your bold opinion
@logicman81. NOT legal- consistent in awareness; a predator's ability convicted in one state to hop to another and commit more atrociousness before required to check on with parole officer.
Same for physicians... Malpractice being investigated in one state allows physician to get licensed in other states. -
Convictions even - due diligence should be federally wired up and accountability should be federal to communicate those allegations to conviction that regulates and a waiting period for granting licenses to multiple states. Physicians state hop.
Molestation legal in some states gaining momentum????
Anyone advocating for that? Bring on every argument, every atom of being pissed is welcome just use your real name and what state you're from
Right here I'm waiting.
how exactly would the nation be stronger if the states are more divided.
Choice. Aren't Democrats all about choice, or just one particular choice? (and I'm not talkin about school choice ;)
say what you will about democrats, I don't care. but the poll was asking which choice would make the nation stronger, not which one is a better dream world.
Letting the school decide who they want to hire is also not unreasonable.
That's why we have states! Gee whiz
UNITED States. Not 50 different little countries.
Just like Russia right? Oh wait....
State powers are better because all 50 states have different resources, values, and needs. Let the states act in their own unique interests as much as possible
So diversity is fine for college enrollment but not state/regional laws? Does this mean democrats really don't like diversity when it counts? IE: when it directly affects them?
That's an idiotic analogy. Very, very different definitions of diversity you're trying to use that have zero in common.
Different definitions of diversity? Seriously? It means the same thing (if you even know what it means) but it's applied differently based on political standings. Wow.
15% of Republicans were confused by the word diversity!! ;)
Our country DID work better when states had more power. Communities have their own priorities and values, and forcing some monolithic ideal of society on all 330 million of us is stupid and a wrong fit for nearly everyone.
I answered diversity, but there are some things that just shouldn't be left to the states, especially some social issues.
Good luck getting everyone to agree on abortion!
This was a difficult one for me. Federalism lets the states act as labs for public policy. If they do something great then the other states can adopt it. Nut if they screw it up then only one state is affected.
But uniformity in laws under a unitary system brings stability, predictability. Fed govt can address problems/flaws the states can't or won't. Equality of opportunity is better addressed at a natl level rather than the states
Diversity, I thought that was the plan
diversity among the people but if there is diversity among the states it would be hard to regulate laws between states.
We manage it now
at the moment we are at the midpoint. lets say we give the states more power to do so it would be more difficult
Sorry not giving up states rights
I don't understand. Every state has its own laws for driving, food regulation, and criminal laws. What gets muddled here??
For the most part, either something should be legal or it shouldn't. Civil rights for example...I don't know why we allow some states to be unreasonably oppressive. State should only legislate inherently location dependent things like minimum wage.
Please provide an example of how a state oppresses it's citizens
I did, in the same sentence...civil rights. It's kinda cliche at this point, but marriage equality (or lack thereof) is the most obvious example.
Civil rights and marriage are two completely different things. Why is the government even involved in marriage? And sorry civil rights is not an example due to the fact it covers such a wide range of topics
That IS how our constitutional Republic is set up. Many laboratories of experimentation with one loosely held federal umbrella. Strong state governments with a weaker federal gov.
This one of the fundamental differences between liberals and conservative.
NY is different then Iowa!
And Trenton is different than Paramus. What is your point?
Diversity is essential in the States as well as in the population.
if all are equal then we become a nation of sheep. diversity in my opinion equals checks and balance on some small scale
Providing a basic set of laws that are fundamental across all states isn't becoming sheep. As many have already pointed out, it provides stability.
Well a country is technically "stronger" when it's legally homogenous, but that's not necessarily a good thing.
It really depends on the laws in question. Anything to do with civil rights and equality I think should be handled federally. Probably most other things are fine being handled by the states, but I'm sure there are still exceptions.
A good mix I'd say. Some things need to be federally dealt with though... Civil rights, immigration, anything that can have a significant impact on neighboring states.
Nevada has legalized prostitution and gambling. Would you want the ability to stop us from having those freedoms?
Can we have that too in ohio - lol
If evryone agrees, someone is not speaking up. Both sides need to be presented
Anyone need a new face to follow?
I thought that unity brought more strength?!?! So, the majority says that the more we become diverse, more and more different from each other, .... The stronger we become ??? Maybe I got the meaning of stronger wrong then......
Most state laws are ones that limit freedom.
In our case, one size does not fit all.
73% in favor of the people and states having most of the say in governance, yet we continue to put up with this bullspit out of Washington? It's time we made our voices heard together. Screw D.C.
Remember the people are alway in full control of the government. Who put the people at Washington in office?
We put them in power, yes. But it seems we've forgotten how to kick them OUT of power once they go bad.
the illuminati puts the people in office in Washington
Tiny, you're screwing with the liberals' heads with this question!!!
The "country" is better off with strong federal but I am a proponent of STRONG STATES!!!!
Interesting. I'm a proponent of weak Feds and weak states
Amazing......according to these polls we all think we should be 'racially' diverse but we don't think states should be diverse. Strange...hypocritical much?
Wait I'm going nuts and color blind. Don't mind me....
Congratulations, you've effectively doomed Mississippi.
Ah the "poor Mississippi" argument.
"Unique" and "laws" together sounds like a recipe for a clusterfu€%.
It really depends on what kind of laws we are talking about here. Security, currency, stuff like that, let federal do. But the 10th amendment is there for a reason
States have to compete for people. Because its totally normal to pack up and move away from jobs, friends, and family to go live in a different state a couple times. Sounds reasonable.
I am just over 50. I have lived on 3 continents and over 15 states, over 30 moves. Maybe not reasonable to you but it works for me.
That's true, but it's more reasonable than moving countries.
If only states made laws there would probably still be slavery in a few states.
They wouldn't be able to compete with the states that didn't have slavery.
That was the original intent, a minimal federal gov. For national defense and foreign trade, all other laws were to be regulated by the individual states. Citizens could vote with their feet when a state gov. got out of control. No longer :-(
Diversity except in civil rights cases. The federal government must protect the minority.
No they don't.
The more local a government, the more representative it will of the people.
it will be* of the people
Is this an advocation of anarchism?
If you wanted to carry it to the final logical extreme, then I suppose it would be. But it is true nonetheless.
go north cackalac
Of course, the states have to compete with each other on best public policy which leads to innovation and adoption of good policies.