Are we straddling our candidates with state issues because we lack an understanding of government

[CK_John]

or is it intellectual laziness?

Three issues come to mind; abortion, gay marriage, and voting mechanics.

These are state issues with minor adjustments. Roe v Wade just says the states have to allow abortions and can not interfere for the first trimester. After that the states set the rules. If Roe v Wade is overturned the states again retain full control.

In order to change, a constitutional amendment will then be required, again ratified by 38 states.

Gay marriage is a state function as already enacted in Ma and civil unions in VT. The major question that may go before the Supreme Court is must other states honor the contract. Even The SC is afraid of this one, because it will effect all interstate contracts, which could put all deeds, wills, and any financial contract in question.

In order to change, a constitutional amendment will then be required, again ratified by 38 states.

Voting mechanics is given to the states by the constitution. They have a wide degree of latitude over place, time, registration rules, and type of machine used. The Feds can just provide the money, with a offer the states find hard to turn down.

In order to change, a constitutional amendment will then be required, again ratified by 38 states.

We can be assured that the GOP understand this process, IMO they have us chasing our tails, wasting time and energy in all the wrong places.

[EFerrari]

1. Saddling. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

2. Um, I'm not straddling my candidates at all. What you do is of course your own business.

[CK_John]

3. I guess helping the campaign, is off the table. n/t