Which of these United States federal departments would you abolish?

Philip55 · 03-24-2005, 08:54 AM

Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department Homeland Security
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of State
Department of Transportation
Department of the Treasury
Department of Veterans Affairs

Go.

Link2000 · 03-24-2005, 10:32 AM

First on the list is Department of Education. The States should be fully responsible just like the provinces are up here.

***CaptHayfever*** · 03-24-2005, 12:16 PM

Yep, I pick Education as well.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

Beam Yosho the Drunkard · 03-24-2005, 05:28 PM

Department Homeland Security.

Or rather the Director of Homeland Security. They came up with the 'color code terror alert system' and haven't done jack**** since.

imported_ · 03-24-2005, 10:26 PM

^Uh. He resigned. A while ago. It was in the news?

Defense, Treasury, and State. Leave that stuff to the states. Get off my back, Uncle Sam!

The Missing Link · 03-24-2005, 10:36 PM

Department of Education.

imported_ · 03-24-2005, 10:42 PM

I don't see the problem with having national educational guidelines and a department to establish and monitor them.

Defense, though. That's some ridiculous bull****. Michigan Militia baby!

Nick · 04-06-2005, 07:48 PM

Lack of federal standards would allow backwater dump states like Alabama, Kentucky, or Louisiana to stop teaching things like evolution, natural selection, various works of classical literature for whatever idiotic reasoning, algebra because some crackpots thing its evil, or what have you. If anything, the fed should have more control on basic curriculum so a high school grad in Kentucky is on the same level as one in California.

Vet Affairs could be eaten up by defense. Outside of that, the only real wasteful one is homeland security since it still doesn't fix the massive amounts of overlap between Military, Justice, and several other departments.

Philip55 · 04-07-2005, 11:49 AM

It is none of the federal government's business what the citizens of Alabama teach their children, just as it is none of the federal government's business what the citizens of England teach their children.

The feds have no constitutional leverage over such matters, and the Federalist Papers make nothing more clear.

Nick · 04-07-2005, 03:08 PM

Education in the 18th century wasn't all encompassing or important. Education now is a necessity on far too many levels and a standard of education set by the fed. serves an economic interest in the long term.

DELICIOUS POISON · 04-07-2005, 03:26 PM

"Homeland Security" ..

Really. F*ck the border.

**Prince Toad** · 04-07-2005, 04:58 PM

Homeland Security. Pointless.

Lurch is completely right. Philip, you seem to really not grasp the fact that states are under the governance of the federal government. We've been in this argument before, and I think you ended up trolling and getting your ass banned again. Alabama is part of the United States (unfortunately). England isn't. Have we got this?

Philip55 · 04-07-2005, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Great Tyrant:
Education in the 18th century wasn't all encompassing or important. Education now is a necessity on far too many levels and a standard of education set by the fed. serves an economic interest in the long term.

Irrelevant. If you think the federal government should be involved in education, you can convince a large enough number of Americans and pass a constitutional amendment.

Until then, the Constitution means today what it meant in the 18th century, with the sole exception of 27 articles of amendment.

Philip55 · 04-07-2005, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Prince Toad:
Philip, you seem to really not grasp the fact that states are under the governance of the federal government.

The states and federal government are cosovereign. http://speaker.house.gov/library/tex...st/default.asp

The powers of the federal government are few and defined, and in those areas they are supreme. In other areas, the states are supreme, and all power is derived from them.

Read the 10th amendment.

Flamethrower Mario · 04-07-2005, 06:01 PM

Madison and Jay were smart dudes, but isn't it possible that the best form of government for the late 18th century may not be the best for the early 21st?

Actually, I agree with you on education (on the idea that national standards aren't helpful), but in general I don't side much with states rights.

[ April 07, 2005, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: FM ]

The Missing Link · 04-07-2005, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FM:
Madison and Jay were smart dudes, but isn't it possible that the best form of government for the late 18th century may not be the best for the early 21st?

There are two competing principles at play then. There's the Elastic Clause and the Amendment Process. Those things that are deemed within the Elastic Clause can implicitly be passed by Congress, et al. Everything else needs to be approved by Amendment, regardless of how good an idea is.

Like the no death penalty for kids under 18. Good idea; I like it. Problem is that it so is constitutional unless otherwise passed by Congress.

Philip55 · 04-07-2005, 07:46 PM

The "Elastic Clause" (though I don't like the term, because it's extremely misleading) merely provides efficacy for carrying out the enumerated powers. It does not create any new powers.

Flamethrower Mario · 04-08-2005, 02:43 PM

I'm not arguing against the proccesses we have now, just against the idea that the federalist papers should have relevance today.

Mushigander · 05-21-2005, 07:20 PM

Definitely the Department of ED.

Quote:

Irrelevant. If you think the federal government should be involved in education, you can convince a large enough number of Americans and pass a constitutional amendment.

It was about stretching the constitutional limits from the get-go. An amendment would take years of challenge, debate, and controversy just to pass.

The Missing Link · 05-21-2005, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mushigander:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Irrelevant. If you think the federal government should be involved in education, you can convince a large enough number of Americans and pass a constitutional amendment.

It was about stretching the constitutional limits from the get-go. An amendment would take years of challenge, debate, and controversy just to pass. </font>[/quote]That's very much why the amendment process was so difficult, so that change would be hard to come by.

Just because the change is "hard" doesn't mean that any other "easier" governmental process should be used to enact it. A court decision that is not based upon the Constitution, no matter how "right" it is, is not a substitute for passing an amendment for it.

"There are some who call me... Link?"

"Carpe Gaium Domesticum!" (Seize the Cucco!)
Zelda: The Grand Adventures | Triforce MUCK
ザ行方不明リンク
悪いユウモアの賢人

03-24-2005, 08:54 AM	#1
Philip55 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 142 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,838.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,338.00 Donate	Department of Agriculture Department of Commerce Department of Defense Department of Education Department of Energy Department of Health and Human Services Department Homeland Security Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of the Interior Department of Justice Department of Labor Department of State Department of Transportation Department of the Treasury Department of Veterans Affairs Go.

03-24-2005, 10:32 AM	#2
Link2000 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Ontario, Canada Gender: Posts: 8,052 Thanks: 1 Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts Points: 16,824.15 Bank: 804.22 Total Points: 17,628.37 Donate	First on the list is Department of Education. The States should be fully responsible just like the provinces are up here.

03-24-2005, 12:16 PM	#3
*CaptHayfever* Smash Supermod Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: (n) - the place where I am Gender: Posts: 19,783 Thanks: 235 Thanked 942 Times in 574 Posts Points: 117,372.76 Bank: 1,811.26 Total Points: 119,184.03 Donate	Yep, I pick Education as well. And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

03-24-2005, 05:28 PM	#4
Beam Yosho the Drunkard Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The oversized rock of Hawaii. Gender: Posts: 5,664 Thanks: 5 Thanked 17 Times in 13 Posts Points: 23,833.39 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 24,333.39 Donate	Department Homeland Security. Or rather the Director of Homeland Security. They came up with the 'color code terror alert system' and haven't done jack**** since.

03-24-2005, 10:26 PM	#5
imported_ Banned Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,579.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,079.00 Donate	^Uh. He resigned. A while ago. It was in the news? Defense, Treasury, and State. Leave that stuff to the states. Get off my back, Uncle Sam!

03-24-2005, 10:36 PM	#6
The Missing Link Professional Lurker Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: New Hyrule, Washington, US Gender: Posts: 15,751 Thanks: 88 Thanked 317 Times in 215 Posts Points: 15,808.73 Bank: 108,481.53 Total Points: 124,290.26 Donate	Department of Education.

03-24-2005, 10:42 PM	#7
imported_ Banned Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,579.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,079.00 Donate	I don't see the problem with having national educational guidelines and a department to establish and monitor them. Defense, though. That's some ridiculous bull****. Michigan Militia baby!

04-06-2005, 07:48 PM	#8
Nick Banned Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 10,950.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 11,450.00 Donate	Lack of federal standards would allow backwater dump states like Alabama, Kentucky, or Louisiana to stop teaching things like evolution, natural selection, various works of classical literature for whatever idiotic reasoning, algebra because some crackpots thing its evil, or what have you. If anything, the fed should have more control on basic curriculum so a high school grad in Kentucky is on the same level as one in California. Vet Affairs could be eaten up by defense. Outside of that, the only real wasteful one is homeland security since it still doesn't fix the massive amounts of overlap between Military, Justice, and several other departments.

04-07-2005, 11:49 AM	#9
Philip55 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 142 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,838.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,338.00 Donate	It is none of the federal government's business what the citizens of Alabama teach their children, just as it is none of the federal government's business what the citizens of England teach their children. The feds have no constitutional leverage over such matters, and the Federalist Papers make nothing more clear.

04-07-2005, 03:08 PM	#10
Nick Banned Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 10,950.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 11,450.00 Donate	Education in the 18th century wasn't all encompassing or important. Education now is a necessity on far too many levels and a standard of education set by the fed. serves an economic interest in the long term.

04-07-2005, 03:26 PM	#11
DELICIOUS POISON Retro Nintendo Supermod Art & Literature Mod Metroid Mod Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I rub my tilde all over your asterisk Gender: Posts: 16,563 Thanks: 554 Thanked 1,590 Times in 784 Posts Points: 6,627.69 Bank: 3,462,620.43 Total Points: 3,469,248.12 Donate	"Homeland Security" .. Really. F*ck the border.

04-07-2005, 04:58 PM	#12
Prince Toad PC Mod Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Rookery Gender: Posts: 11,428 Thanks: 43 Thanked 59 Times in 50 Posts Points: 45,869.55 Bank: 26,666.46 Total Points: 72,536.01 Donate	Homeland Security. Pointless. Lurch is completely right. Philip, you seem to really not grasp the fact that states are under the governance of the federal government. We've been in this argument before, and I think you ended up trolling and getting your ass banned again. Alabama is part of the United States (unfortunately). England isn't. Have we got this?

04-07-2005, 06:01 PM	#15
Flamethrower Mario Member Join Date: Apr 2000 Posts: 1,973 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 3,990.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 4,490.00 Donate	Madison and Jay were smart dudes, but isn't it possible that the best form of government for the late 18th century may not be the best for the early 21st? Actually, I agree with you on education (on the idea that national standards aren't helpful), but in general I don't side much with states rights. [ April 07, 2005, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: FM ]

04-07-2005, 07:46 PM	#17
Philip55 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 142 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 4,838.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 5,338.00 Donate	The "Elastic Clause" (though I don't like the term, because it's extremely misleading) merely provides efficacy for carrying out the enumerated powers. It does not create any new powers.

04-08-2005, 02:43 PM	#18
Flamethrower Mario Member Join Date: Apr 2000 Posts: 1,973 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 3,990.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 4,490.00 Donate	I'm not arguing against the proccesses we have now, just against the idea that the federalist papers should have relevance today.