Home
Almost there. I see the end coming soon. I can taste it. It seems so long ago since I rushed Kappa Alpha Pi pre-law co-ed fraternity. From the moment I had to write journals every day, I knew it was going to be a struggle to do each and every journal. However, I haven’t done something like this in a long time. My dad made me write journals every day on a notebook. Eventually, he gave up because I no longer felt the need to write mundane materials on my every day life. But I guess it’s good to write and reflect on my day. When I go back and read some of these journals, it reminds me how far I’ve come since my pledging days. I’m reading about the times I went to the social event, to the time I had my first interview, to the time I got a lot of punishments. I’m definitely not going to miss those. Those punishments screwed me over. I didn’t mind doing them. They were just time consuming. Every minute and hour is vital to me. I spent a lot of hours doing punishments. I feel very exhausted. I’m exhausted because I volunteered at Salvation Army today, taking care of kids. It was kind of like a daycare thing. The kids were wild though. They never run out of motor. I wonder what these kids think about the centralization of government
Ever since the birth of United States of America, there has always been a controversy as to how big of a role federal government should have in all affairs of the nation. The Constitution, no doubt, was created to favor the central government with most of the powers. Therefore, the federal government has used these powers given by the Constitution to test its powers beyond the limit. Several clauses in the Constitution has been used as an excuse for the federal government’s expansion of its power, such as the Taxing and Spending Clause, Necessary and Proper Clause, Supremacy Clause, and the Commerce Clause. Although some think that government utilizes these clauses within its limits, evidence proves otherwise. The federal government interprets and uses these clauses in the broadest and expansive sense to execute statutes and laws that render state sovereignty almost useless.
The federal government’s use of the Commerce Clause effectively diminishes the state sovereignty over local and intrastate commerce while increasing its authority over almost all areas of commerce in the U.S, which is reflected in the Supreme Court’s ruling on Wickard v. Filburn. This ruling clearly states that federal government cannot regulate manufacturing of a product or question the intent of the manufacturer because it is an intrastate matter. The Supreme Court clearly acknowledged the sovereignty of states over local affairs. However, Wickard v. Filburn changed this, and allowed federal government to regulate almost all commercial matters in the U.S.
In this case, Roscoe Filburn sued secretary of agriculture Claude Wickard over the 1938 Agricultural Adjustment Act. Filburn planted a few extra acres of wheat despite for personal use, and the government promptly fined him. Filburn argued that he should not be fined since the wheat was being used for his own farm, and was not part of any interstate or intrastate commerce. However, the Supreme Court disagreed. The ruling completely upset the precedent set by United States v. E.C. Knight Co. Now government could regulate even areas of intrastate commerce such as production if the government assumed the aggregate affect of the practice could directly or indirectly impact the economy of the nation. The interpretation of the Commerce Clause was used way too broadly in this case, which aided the expansion of the “Big Government.” Since then, the Congress wielded the power of the Commerce Clause to regulate a great number of activities that were previously considered as intrastate commerce, which weakened sovereignty of the states.
Ever since the birth of United States of America, there has always been a controversy as to how big of a role federal government should have in all affairs of the nation. The Constitution, no doubt, was created to favor the central government with most of the powers. Therefore, the federal government has used these powers given by the Constitution to test its powers beyond the limit. Several clauses in the Constitution has been used as an excuse for the federal government’s expansion of its power, such as the Taxing and Spending Clause, Necessary and Proper Clause, Supremacy Clause, and the Commerce Clause. Although some think that government utilizes these clauses within its limits, evidence proves otherwise. The federal government interprets and uses these clauses in the broadest and expansive sense to execute statutes and laws that render state sovereignty almost useless.
The federal government’s use of the Commerce Clause effectively diminishes the state sovereignty over local and intrastate commerce while increasing its authority over almost all areas of commerce in the U.S, which is reflected in the Supreme Court’s ruling on Wickard v. Filburn. This ruling clearly states that federal government cannot regulate manufacturing of a product or question the intent of the manufacturer because it is an intrastate matter. The Supreme Court clearly acknowledged the sovereignty of states over local affairs. However, Wickard v. Filburn changed this, and allowed federal government to regulate almost all commercial matters in the U.S.
In this case, Roscoe Filburn sued secretary of agriculture Claude Wickard over the 1938 Agricultural Adjustment Act. Filburn planted a few extra acres of wheat despite for personal use, and the government promptly fined him. Filburn argued that he should not be fined since the wheat was being used for his own farm, and was not part of any interstate or intrastate commerce. However, the Supreme Court disagreed. The ruling completely upset the precedent set by United States v. E.C. Knight Co. Now government could regulate even areas of intrastate commerce such as production if the government assumed the aggregate affect of the practice could directly or indirectly impact the economy of the nation. The interpretation of the Commerce Clause was used way too broadly in this case, which aided the expansion of the “Big Government.” Since then, the Congress wielded the power of the Commerce Clause to regulate a great number of activities that were previously considered as intrastate commerce, which weakened sovereignty of the states.
