<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is It Time For A Federalism Amendment ?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/23/is-it-time-for-a-federalism-amendment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/23/is-it-time-for-a-federalism-amendment/</link>
	<description>Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 18:26:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Bowen</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/23/is-it-time-for-a-federalism-amendment/#comment-65794</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Bowen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=5474#comment-65794</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By the way, I think you, like many others, overestimate men like Madison, Hamilton, Washington, and Franklin (and even Jefferson).  While their abilities were certainly second-to-none, they all had their own agendas that conflicted with the best interests of the people as a whole.  It does no good to accuse others of misunderstanding history or the actors involved in it if we&#039;re misunderstanding it as well.  Did those men do &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; good things?  Sure.  Did they do &lt;i&gt;many&lt;/i&gt; things that led to what we are now dealing with?  Absolutely.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, I think you, like many others, overestimate men like Madison, Hamilton, Washington, and Franklin (and even Jefferson).  While their abilities were certainly second-to-none, they all had their own agendas that conflicted with the best interests of the people as a whole.  It does no good to accuse others of misunderstanding history or the actors involved in it if we&#8217;re misunderstanding it as well.  Did those men do <i>some</i> good things?  Sure.  Did they do <i>many</i> things that led to what we are now dealing with?  Absolutely.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Bowen</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/23/is-it-time-for-a-federalism-amendment/#comment-65791</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Bowen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:08:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=5474#comment-65791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;a document that, to this day stands as the blueprint for the best system of government yet devised.&lt;/i&gt;

You know, this would have been true at the time of its creation and adoption, but it certainly isn&#039;t true today.  The Swiss system, in my opinion, which is based upon my reading of the non-authoritative English translation that is available online, is a far better system.  It provides for a method for the people themselves, without requiring them to go first to their respective state governments, to alter the federal constitution.

Of course, their system was never intended to govern vast swaths of territory.  Even at the time of the creation and signing of the American Constitution, the American states, under the AoC, covered what is still today, though it seems less because of modern technology, a huge amount of territory.  In my opinion, the greatest problem with our federal system isn&#039;t the Constitution (though there are certainly many problems with it) but the number of states in it.  The country is simply too big.  Instead of everyone being offended at the recent remarks of Gov. Perry and Ron Paul, people ought to simply realize, as many did at the time of the writing of and adoption of the Constitution, that such a huge territory and number of people simply can&#039;t be governed effectively by a single governing body and that the greater the number of people being governed by a single government, the greater the odds are that there will be conflict.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>a document that, to this day stands as the blueprint for the best system of government yet devised.</i></p>
<p>You know, this would have been true at the time of its creation and adoption, but it certainly isn&#8217;t true today.  The Swiss system, in my opinion, which is based upon my reading of the non-authoritative English translation that is available online, is a far better system.  It provides for a method for the people themselves, without requiring them to go first to their respective state governments, to alter the federal constitution.</p>
<p>Of course, their system was never intended to govern vast swaths of territory.  Even at the time of the creation and signing of the American Constitution, the American states, under the AoC, covered what is still today, though it seems less because of modern technology, a huge amount of territory.  In my opinion, the greatest problem with our federal system isn&#8217;t the Constitution (though there are certainly many problems with it) but the number of states in it.  The country is simply too big.  Instead of everyone being offended at the recent remarks of Gov. Perry and Ron Paul, people ought to simply realize, as many did at the time of the writing of and adoption of the Constitution, that such a huge territory and number of people simply can&#8217;t be governed effectively by a single governing body and that the greater the number of people being governed by a single government, the greater the odds are that there will be conflict.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/23/is-it-time-for-a-federalism-amendment/#comment-65784</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:56:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=5474#comment-65784</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I suggest that everyone go to:http://www.nolanchart.com/authors/articles/article.php?ArticleID=6334 and read the article which discusses several misstatements of fact made by Mr. Barnett in his WSJ article.

However, despite whatever concerns there may be about a convention, the fact remains that all 50 states have submitted over 750 applications for an Article V Convention. Congress must call a convention if there are 34 applications. 

Therefore it is time to begin to deal with concerns such as this author mentions. The answer in this case is the Constitution forbids any federal officer (which is all the names he mentions as they are all members of Congress) from holding a second federal office at the same time. Hence, none of them will be connected with the convention.

You can read the applications and learn the facts about a convention at www.foavc.org. Thank you for your time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suggest that everyone go to:<a href="http://www.nolanchart.com/authors/articles/article.php?ArticleID=6334" rel="nofollow">http://www.nolanchart.com/authors/articles/article.php?ArticleID=6334</a> and read the article which discusses several misstatements of fact made by Mr. Barnett in his WSJ article.</p>
<p>However, despite whatever concerns there may be about a convention, the fact remains that all 50 states have submitted over 750 applications for an Article V Convention. Congress must call a convention if there are 34 applications. </p>
<p>Therefore it is time to begin to deal with concerns such as this author mentions. The answer in this case is the Constitution forbids any federal officer (which is all the names he mentions as they are all members of Congress) from holding a second federal office at the same time. Hence, none of them will be connected with the convention.</p>
<p>You can read the applications and learn the facts about a convention at <a href="http://www.foavc.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.foavc.org</a>. Thank you for your time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephan Kinsella</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/23/is-it-time-for-a-federalism-amendment/#comment-65749</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephan Kinsella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:07:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=5474#comment-65749</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I point out other issues with Barnett&#039;s proposal at the Mises Blog  here http://blog.mises.org/archives/009837.asp]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I point out other issues with Barnett&#8217;s proposal at the Mises Blog  here <a href="http://blog.mises.org/archives/009837.asp" rel="nofollow">http://blog.mises.org/archives/009837.asp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
