Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Sen. Sanders' consistency" video.

  1. Money in politics would not be an issue if the federal government had limitations in it's power and we had more state rights like in the past.  If the federal government does not have power then it can't be bought, it is that simple. So Bernie, who is running as a democrat, wins and expands the power of the federal government, what is going to stop other politicians in the future from misusing that power? This is why the founding fathers wanted a limited federal government and state rights.  It was to place control on the government.
    2
  2. +TheGreatCat123 With state governments you can control them easier. Ever noticed how state policies are passed easier? Also you have the ability to move to another state if you don't like how one is being ran. People do that as it.
    1
  3. +TheGreatCat123 They can try, but the people will see it effect them more directly. And people can also move. We have a congress with a very low approval rating, but a high retention rating. People know what they want, you can get it with smaller more local government. You get it at the state level. I can already tell you my opinion on the video, you solve it by removing the ability of the federal government to give favors. If the federal government had limited power then it doesn't have the power to give out favors to those who purchase it. Bernie is just going to compound our problems. A similar question was asked of this to Herman Cain a few years back, after Bernie gives the federal government control of healthcare and college and teenage employment and jobs etc., thus giving them more power, what is going to stop the future president after Bernie is gone from abusing that power?
    1
  4. +TheGreatCat123 There is corruption but you hardly hear it at the state level, and when it does happen they get caught. You can look up state corruption and how they actually get convicted. For example Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell or Patrick Cannon, Mayor of Charlotte, NC. Politicians will take bribes, you are more likely to catch them and hold them accountable at the local level. We need a government, but we also need control over it. You get that with smaller more local government and the constitution. EU governments are small. Those countries are smaller than most of our states. I have no problem looking at those countries for example and then states implementing what they do. I have a problem with implementing what those countries do at the federal level. What happens in the EU actually supports state rights. Denmark, Finland, Norway etc. are all smaller than most of our states. Iceland is smaller than my city I live in. "Can you imagine how messy can it be that every state is different? " It will actually be ran better because states will be competing with each other. Plus every state deals with different issues. Having a one size fits all policy simply won't work. When the federal government gets involved things get messy. Education has always been ran by the states. The department of ed was created in 1980 and has become a mess ever since. I agree that education is important, but allowing a centralize government that overseas 300 million people to control education is dangerous. They can control what is taught and what isn't which is indoctrination. With states if one state uses education as indoctrination they won't go far because neighboring states won't and will do better economically. Overall state rights is about checks and balances. Never put all your eggs in one basket.
    1
  5. +moneymaker2dx If a state does not follow the constitution then the people need to bring it up to the courts. Also at the state level people can move and remain a US citizen. More times then not the state goes in favor of the people. Our growing income inequality if because of the federal government, not the free market.
    1