now please attack the idea not the person
let me be the 1st to say, as someone who has been pretty tough on ya the last few weeks, that we do need more of that. well, less attacking the person anyway. ideas, especially those expressed in good faith, really don't need to be "attacked" but i get your point.
and it's a good point.
i'm not sure however how into the idea of adding layers of governement to solve problems of disconnect. i'm also not sure how constitutional it is to reorganize the usa as you suggest. the constitution is quite specific about the way we do these things. changing them, in the manner that you suggest would essentially mean a constitutional convention..which is pretty radical. but lots of good people have suggested it in the past for various reasons, most well intentioned ones.
federalists, ie, states rights advocates, would argue something along the lines that the constitution does indeed already provide for such an arrangement as you suggest. but the states have allowed the fed to overpower them and have assumed duties and responsibilities, that as you suggest, belong to the states.
as far as the statehoods of puerto rico and various canadian and mexican lands go, i'm not too sure about that as well. again, the constitution does provide for a clear path to statehood that has been more or less followed thru for all the states beyond the orig 13, who had their own way...by signing on to the constitution that set up the procedure.
i do believe there is something in the works about dc getting proper representation in congress,,,finally...or something...i'm not sure. i have to admit, in all the other news happening, i only caught a snippet a while back and never saw the full story.
and dan, i like the fact that you are bringing your ideas to the table. i might not agree with them, and in the future, you might not either. or we could all come around to your way of thinking...who knows...but again, the most important thing is that they are YOUR ideas. way to think!
