Harold Jackson | States' rights: A 19th Century concept rears its head again

[BridgeTheGap]

Americans today have so many distractions that few realize their country has been gripped by a critical debate over states' rights that parallels the pre-Civil War argument over preserving the Union.

That's not to say people are ready to meet on the battlefield, brother against brother, to settle the current dispute. But today's arguments could have an effect on the role of the federal government that is just as profound.

From immigration and health care reform to abortion rights and gay marriage, states are asserting the right to regulate the legal status and social conduct of their residents. Conservative courts may lean in their favor, and Congress appears too politically divided to put up a fight.

The similarities to the states' rights arguments of more than a century ago struck me while I was reading Jon Meacham's Pulitzer Prize-winning biography American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House. While Abraham Lincoln gets deserved credit as the savior of the Union, having won the Civil War, Jackson blocked a Southern march toward secession 30 years earlier.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20100730/OPINION04/307300009/1054/OPINION/Harold+Jackson+|+States++rights++A+19th+Century+concept+rears+its+head+again

[Uncle Joe]

1. Kicked and recommended.

He further noted that although the states elect their own senators and representatives, they “are paid by the United States, not by the State; nor are they accountable to it for any act done in the performance of their legislative functions; … it is their first and highest duty, as representatives of the United States, to promote the general good.”

Thanks for the thread, BridgeTheGap.:thumbsup: