Addressing it at the federal level is exactly how you avoid the issues of the Blotto game.
We may be in violent agreement, with merely differing terms. Well, terms and fundamental beliefs in the role of the central government.
I think you were referring to the many state battlefields with each issue, right? I don’t really have a problem with that. If the overwhelming majority supports the issue (and I don’t disagree that they do), then the overwhelming majority of the states will support it. The will of the people gets served. If the states pass stupid laws, the people will leave and go live somewhere that doesn’t have stupid laws.
I was talking about one federal battlefield with many differing topics dividing our limited time while congress is in session. Congress spends time on things like H.R. 4040 and bringing up new ways to overturn Roe V. Wade instead of fixing more pressing issues. The more issues we remove from their consideration, the more likely they are to focus on something meaningful.
Besides, what if meatheads like This from Arizona get control over the congress? Removing the issue from the federal discourse can prevent such an idiocy from being enacted at the federal level.
* * item2.1
# # item2.1
Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.