Unnecessary An Unconstitutional Federal Agencies
I was watching Glen Beck on CNN Headlines when he mentioned an incident some years ago where Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh led his Rajinese religious members in a terrorist attack on the town by poisoning the food supply of The Dalles, Oregon in an attempt to take over the town. His idea was that these E. Coli outbreaks may be a terrorist attack on America and that the Department of Homeland Security should be involved. E. Coli poisonings are normal and there is no evidence that the situation has worsened in recent years though our food supply is made vulnerable to such a hypothetical attack by the speed and efficiency of transport system,. Never the less I do not believe that Homeland Security needs to have any direct control of the situation since state and federal agencies do exist that are already on the job and are hopefully competent enough to do it.
The federal agencies are my concern because I question the need and constitutionality of them. The Department of Agriculture for instance. The only power that the federal government has is there ability to regulate commerce between states and nations and the FDA already serves to enforce those laws for the Federal government. So what does the Department of Agriculture do, that is not already accomplished by the FDA, which is also part of regulating commerce. I do know that only the states have the power to regulate production and trade within their own state
The Federal does make the questionable claim that it has the power to regulate trade within a state if it effect trade between states or nations. I question their claim because they do not have the power to regulate trade in other countries even if it effect trade between nations or between states. Those who passed the U.S. Constitution were big on states rights and they wanted the give the federal government jurisdiction within a state they would have spelled it out especially when you consider the Tenth Amendment which states that any powers not specifically given to the federal government are reserved to the states.
Then there is the question of need. The state governments already have agricultural departments that are just as capable of doing the job as the federal government except they are smaller and thus most likely have less bureaucracy. They can communicate with the federal government in those areas where concerns are and the FDA has the power to enforce any standards put out by Congress. In addition the voting public for the state government is smaller which theoretically grants the individual more power in controlling their fate.
So in conclusion why are we paying for a government agency than seems to be unneeded and unconstitutional. I have the same question about the United States Department of Health and Human Services as states also have the same departments that do the same job and it appears to be a useless duplication of services that I see no justification for in the U.S. Constitution. To answer my own question, the only reason I see that these organizations exist at our expense to give the federal government unconstitutional power over the states and therefore over the people of those states and of the United States.
Source 1 is an account of the E. coli outbreaks
The federal agencies are my concern because I question the need and constitutionality of them. The Department of Agriculture for instance. The only power that the federal government has is there ability to regulate commerce between states and nations and the FDA already serves to enforce those laws for the Federal government. So what does the Department of Agriculture do, that is not already accomplished by the FDA, which is also part of regulating commerce. I do know that only the states have the power to regulate production and trade within their own state
The Federal does make the questionable claim that it has the power to regulate trade within a state if it effect trade between states or nations. I question their claim because they do not have the power to regulate trade in other countries even if it effect trade between nations or between states. Those who passed the U.S. Constitution were big on states rights and they wanted the give the federal government jurisdiction within a state they would have spelled it out especially when you consider the Tenth Amendment which states that any powers not specifically given to the federal government are reserved to the states.
Then there is the question of need. The state governments already have agricultural departments that are just as capable of doing the job as the federal government except they are smaller and thus most likely have less bureaucracy. They can communicate with the federal government in those areas where concerns are and the FDA has the power to enforce any standards put out by Congress. In addition the voting public for the state government is smaller which theoretically grants the individual more power in controlling their fate.
So in conclusion why are we paying for a government agency than seems to be unneeded and unconstitutional. I have the same question about the United States Department of Health and Human Services as states also have the same departments that do the same job and it appears to be a useless duplication of services that I see no justification for in the U.S. Constitution. To answer my own question, the only reason I see that these organizations exist at our expense to give the federal government unconstitutional power over the states and therefore over the people of those states and of the United States.
Source 1 is an account of the E. coli outbreaks
posted by Kerwin | 10:28 PM
2 Comments:
These federal agencies are good at feeding themselves too. Take welfare for instance: why would the program want to help us get off of welfare?
Welfare under whatever name they wish to put it is a legitimate power of the federal government since they as a artificial person can give gifts to whoever the chose and can claim those gifts are to promote the general welfare.
You are correct about bureaucracies delighting in feeding themselves since they are often top heavy on management. When you have 10 people telling one person what to do it is a good indication that something is not right as well as being very confusing for the person actually doing the work at ground level.
Post a Comment
<< Home