Yesterday, tucked into a larger government funding bill were two amendments that I think represent the constant push and pull in Washington over protecting states’ constitutional rights and expanding federal government power. In this case, the amendments dealt with whether or not banks would be allowed to work with businesses that sell marijuana products in states where it is now legal. Some say that because marijuana is illegal on the federal level, and banks are federally regulated, that the federal government should use its powers under the interstate commerce clause to block banks from doing any business with these companies. In my mind though, the genius of what our founding fathers intended, and explicitly laid out in the Constitution, was that most powers were to be left to the states and individuals rather than the federal government. This concept of federalism would allow those most local to decide for themselves what they believed to be best. This does not mean any one of us would agree with all, or even many, of the decisions other states might make, only that the option of local decision making was far superior for people than one size fits all out of a big central government. And so in this decision the concept of federalism was central, and for me it came down to this simple question – should the federal government be in the business of penalizing someone for following state law? I have never used any drug and don’t want our boys using them, but cutting off access to the banking system for businesses in Colorado that are legal strikes me as overreach and leads one to wonder what other businesses the federal government would try to shut down if it could. Should states that manufacture automatic rifles not be able to use banks because other states outlaw them? Should Coca-Cola not have access to banks because New York City banned big sodas? These might sounds like “out there” examples, but when the federal government starts traveling down the road to expanding its own power, it is hard for states and individuals to get that power back. Whatever side of the debate you fall on for having marijuana be illegal, applying the founding principle of federalism leads me to believe that states should not be constrained by the federal government in matters that most concern their own businesses and citizens. The beauty of the great American experiment and the founding fathers wisdom in including federalism is that it allows states to pioneer on ideas. We see whether they work or fail and the ways in which they do so. It is part of what allows our Republic to innovate and change and as these amendments came to the floor last night, I couldn’t help but think we would be wise to work to preserve that concept…whether we agree or disagree with the local perspective of other states affected.
Posted on: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 19:56:28 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015