When I questioned aloud why, with all that's going on in the U.S. and the world, Congress felt it was necessary to devote so much time to the steroid scandal in Major League Baseball, I was informed that it's because this is a national issue. Congress needs to be involved because kids look up to these athletes and, well, we can't have them thinking that taking anabolic steroids is OK.
That's fine, but why in the world do we have to rely on the federal government to fix the problem? Where in the Constitution does Congress derive its authority to hold investigations and hearings into such matters? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't keeping kids off of drugs what we used to call "parenting"?
That's fine, but why in the world do we have to rely on the federal government to fix the problem? Where in the Constitution does Congress derive its authority to hold investigations and hearings into such matters? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't keeping kids off of drugs what we used to call "parenting"?
Labels: Nanny State
1 Comments:
Every crime is a federal crime: notwithstanding the truism of Federalist #17, which states "the ordinary administration of civil and criminal justice" is "a province of the state governments." Some of my neocon good Republican friends might think me a tad too eccentric for insisting that local/state law enforcement hold the reigns over 9/10 investigations, but only a handful of crimes are enunciated in the Constitution.
One of the problems with overlapping criminal statutes, where the federal statutes (of no constitutional authority,) is that it allows for double jeopardy. If the federal statutes were constrained within their legitimate scope of authority, this would not occur. Those acquitted of criminal charges at state level, for example, have been brought up on federal civil rights charges and federal criminal charges for the same alleged act.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home