quote:
These are people who invariably have a dislike for government, which means that they will derail it at any given moment. Thus, we an inhibiting force when we could have one that recognizes the scope and scale of power and responsibility.

Now we won't have that for decades, because there are people who believe the federal government is bad and the state government is somehow magically incapable of enforcing draconian laws.

One of the main points of having a limited federal government is to allow the states to figure out what works and what doesn't on their own. Colorado can decide to legalize marijuana, while Kansas can decide not to. The same goes for anything except what is specifically prohibited of the states: interstate tariffs, foreign relations, printing money, etc.

The 3 strikes law is a great example. It worked int he first state that passed it, and other states adopted it if they chose.

And the opposite of dislike of government is liking government. There are very, very few things that a federal government program does well or efficiently besides increase its own size and power. It does this by having a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. Government is necessary for a stable society, however in a perfectly stable society commerce cannot expand. Instability is caused when bad business practices fail and are replaced by new methods or businesses. When a government prevents (either purposefully or accidentally) the failure of poor business methods or businesses, it prevents growth. This is should not and cannot be allowed to have.