Quote from: elmerfudd on September 08, 2011, 11:03:07 AM
I already gave it to you.  You disagreed.  Or rejected it.  That's how we got to the impasse.

I'm just trying to figure out exactly what you and other consider to be sovereignty so I understand the argument.

States can't declare war. They can't levy tariffs or excise taxes. They can't enter into treaties or alliances. What's left of sovereignty?

Quote from: Tennenbaum on September 08, 2011, 11:24:13 AM
I'm just trying to figure out exactly what you and other consider to be sovereignty so I understand the argument.

States can't declare war. They can't levy tariffs or excise taxes. They can't enter into treaties or alliances. What's left of sovereignty?

They can levy income taxes and sales taxes on their own citizens.  They can pass laws that affect their own citizens so long as they do not abridge the rights guaranteed by the constitution.  They can subdivide themselves into counties.  Or consolidate into fewer counties.  They can grant corporate charters.  They can decide legal drinking ages (or at least they once could.  Maybe that one went away due to creeping federalism).  Given enough time, I could come up with others, I think.   but this seems like plenty to me.  MIght not to you, though. 

Just thought of this.  Did you know that there is no national election for president? There are separate state elections.  And states get to decide how their electoral votes are awarded.  Sounds pretty sovereign to me. 

And this, just now, later.  I think a state can pick its electors any way it wishes.  They don't have to have a state election for the candidates (which really only picks the electors).

Quote from: elmerfudd on September 08, 2011, 11:31:39 AM
They can levy income taxes and sales taxes on their own citizens.  They can pass laws that affect their own citizens so long as they do not abridge the rights guaranteed by the constitution.  They can subdivide themselves into counties.  Or consolidate into fewer counties.  They can grant corporate charters.  They can decide legal drinking ages (or at least they once could.  Maybe that one went away due to creeping federalism).  Given enough time, I could come up with others, I think.   but this seems like plenty to me.  MIght not to you, though. 

Just thought of this.  Did you know that there is no national election for president? There are separate state elections.  And states get to decide how their electoral votes are awarded.  Sounds pretty sovereign to me. 

And this, just now, later.  I think a state can pick its electors any way it wishes.  They don't have to have a state election for the candidates (which really only picks the electors).

Found this in a Wikipedia article on electors.

The constitutional theory behind the indirect election of both the President and Vice President of the United States is that while the Congress is popularly elected by the people,[30] the President and Vice President are elected to be executives of a federation of independent states.

Quote from: elmerfudd on September 08, 2011, 11:31:39 AM
They can levy income taxes and sales taxes on their own citizens.  They can pass laws that affect their own citizens so long as they do not abridge the rights guaranteed by the constitution.  They can subdivide themselves into counties.  Or consolidate into fewer counties.  They can grant corporate charters.  They can decide legal drinking ages (or at least they once could.  Maybe that one went away due to creeping federalism).  Given enough time, I could come up with others, I think.   but this seems like plenty to me.  MIght not to you, though. 

Just thought of this.  Did you know that there is no national election for president? There are separate state elections.  And states get to decide how their electoral votes are awarded.  Sounds pretty sovereign to me. 

And this, just now, later.  I think a state can pick its electors any way it wishes.  They don't have to have a state election for the candidates (which really only picks the electors).

Just so we are on the same page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty

Quote from: Tennenbaum on September 08, 2011, 12:52:48 PM
Just so we are on the same page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty

See "shared" and "federations" in your link.  And thanks for posting it.  I think it helped my and Shooter's osition more than it did yours.

Quote from: elmerfudd on September 08, 2011, 01:15:28 PM
See "shared" and "federations" in your link.  And thanks for posting it.  I think it helped my and Shooter's osition more than it did yours.

Yes, especially the part where it says that members of a federation do not have the right to withdraw.

We are not a condominium nor are we a co-principality, so not sure how that would help your case.