Many extreme views have been voiced concerning whether the state or whether the nation should have control over the legislation in each individual state. While a majority of voting citizens in Southern states, mostly affiliated with the Democratic political party, seeks to maintain legislative control of their own land, many citizens of the North align with Republicans and lobby for the ability of the government in Washington to interfere when they largely disagree with the state’s decisions. Leaving states to their own devices is a simple solution for those serving in government who do not wish to offend anyone. It seems fair because it permits each state to generate rules to fit the lifestyles and will of its citizens; this way each state can specifically cater to the demands of the people. Imposing an absolute law, though, would ensure that the states remain united and rooted in the traditions and values that the country was founded upon; the overarching government would not hide in ignorance, but rather use power to negate state malpractices. Both these views are limited by the black or white type fallacy. While people argue over national sovereignty and state sovereignty, they fail to understand that both institutions have that same ability, which keeps the other in check, functioning within its own power as outlined by our Constitution.
A healthy view of government, as is paralleled in everyday life, incorporates moderation. The issue of how state laws are regulated is not an “either-or” question, whose solution falls on radical, opposing ends of the spectrum. This extremist point of view leaves no compromise to satisfy a large majority of the citizens. A scale does not always need to be tipped in favor of one method over another; two types of policy can happily exist in equilibrium. The duty and responsibility of government can, and should be, divided between the nation as a whole and individual sections of that nation to ensure that the will of the people is carried out. This dual process is enabled by a symbiosis outlined by the Constitution, beneficial to all, such as instances when two organisms benefit from their interactions. Supreme rule and need not come with absolute sovereignty of either the state or the nation; divided sovereignty can best represent the desires of the populace.
No one would argue that each citizen of the United States is also concurrently a citizen of their own state, whether their residence is located in the North or South. Then it is a small logical step to understand that makes each citizen is under the law of both the larger nation and the individual state. As assumed by the majority, the policies set by the United States government will conflict with the goals set by smaller territories. They worry that conflict will ensure and seek to predict a victor. States must seek to represent their citizens, whose preferences may very well differ from those of citizens in other locations; though as a representative of the United States each smaller territory should uphold the same fundamental values as set by the Constitution – the very same Constitution which limits the power of the government in Washington. There are provisions concerning the intersection of power between the nation and state, employing a functional system of checks and balances. All abide by the Constitution, working separately, to create a country that all can be proud to call home.
There is a fine middle ground between the extreme viewpoints, a solution which incorporates some of each radical notion in a compromise, from ideals which would cause great distress and unrest standing on their own. Imagine the nation as a tree, firmly rooted in the ground, whose branches reach into the upper limits of the sky. The tree exists in both spheres, but also at the intermediate area, where the roots transition into the stump, and the stump eventually divides, morphing into individual limbs. Those roots contain our shared historical background, embracing the freedom we gained when we separated from Great Britain and the monarchy. Those roots anchor us to our ideals, the identity which ties us to our country, keeping us united. As the branches stretch towards the heavens, they split off further and further – into counties, families, and finally individuals – each striving to fulfill their personal guarantee of a right to pursue happiness. Were the roots to shrivel and die so would the tree be crippled and eventually wither, and were the branches to stop reaching upwards towards their own goals and direction, there would be naught by a heap of branches upon the ground. Both elements of earth and air are necessary for the tree as are both elements of government, at varying levels, responsible for the contentment of the United States and the individual states.
Let us no longer argue in favor of absolute power for the nation or the state. Clearly, the best solution is divided sovereignty, splitting the weight of government between two. Both have a duty to represent the people and will seek to do so. When conflict arises, let us be guided by the Constitution, that great document which gives us the answer to solve these disputes. Let both the nation and the state fulfill their legislative responsibilities to their best ability!
No comments:
Post a Comment