The states should have significantly more power than the national government.

I love how you, imabench, posted the exact same comment about the Articles of Confederation to my poll on this very issue just a couple days ago. I would also like to say that I resolved many of the issues you brought up regarding the Articles when I developed my plan. The major reasons the Articles failed was: It was just meant to be a temporary constitution to unite the colonies so that a more permanent constitution would be established-I am not stating that we should create a new constitution, just that the states should have more power, similar to what the tenth amendment states It did not give the national government the power to levy taxes-my plan is a compromise for this problem. It gives the nation a consistent revenue, while not officially levying taxes. Instead, consider it taxing the states, not the people in the states. In my plan, GA can adopt FairTax, California can adopt Flat Tax, and New York can continue with income tax. All states can get the taxing structure they want, and the nation can just take a desired percentage from the states. The nation gets money, the nation controls the amount it gets, the states control the method of taxation, and the states control what the PEOPLE pay. It did not establish a national currency-my plan gave this power to the federal government It did not give the federal government the power to create a military-my plan allows for the establishment of a national military What you believe the national government should do and my counters: 1. You want the national government to regulate commerce. In my plan, the states regulate commerce how they see fit. Every region of the country is very unique, thus one regulation would not work well for the nation as a whole. Each state can simply do what works best for it. Remember this: a state's law regarding a regulation can always be changed or adapted if there is a problem that arises from poor state legislation(nothing has to be written in stone) 2. You want the national government to safeguard civil rights, especially for the Bible Belt. Yes, racism and sexism is bad. I agree. However, how much will civil rights account for? Will safeguarding civil rights include legislation on abortion, gays, guns, etc.. If so, the national government would go too far. Your idea of "safeguarding civil rights" is extremely vague and could end up being taken advantage of and taken out of its original meaning. 3. You want the nation to be able to establish courts and enforce penalties for federal crimes. At first glance, one would not see a problem with this. However, look a little deeper. What kind of punishments. What if one crime in one state is the death penalty and the same crime in another state is a few years in prison(keep in mind that neither of these punishment will violate the cruel and unusual punishments amendment). What would the penalty be then? Furthermore, what if the nation wants one thing to be illegal and the states want it legal, or vice versa? Why not just let the states handle it? Also, remember that the national government has the power to settle disputes between states(in my original plan), so if a crime takes place across different states and the states can't agree on a punishment, the national government DOES HAVE THE POWER TO STEP IN. It is not like the national government just has to stand by and be powerless as the two states argue. 4. You want the nation to be able to deal with other countries. I meant to include this in my original plan but I forgot. This could count under the military aspect of my plan. I will agree that this should be a national power. 5. Your really vague ideas...You want the nation to be able to enforce rules and throw out state legislation as they see fit. So you basically want to give the nation any and all power to rip any state power out of its hands and gather it in the national government. No. I agree that if a state violates the preexisting constitution, it should be handled by the national government. However, the rules cannot change on the states reducing the states laws and legislation. 6. You want the nation to be able to collect revenue from the states. I specifically gave this power to the national government in my plan for revenue collection. Therefore, both of us agree on this national responsibility. My idea basically is the perfect plan for making the most people happy. No, not everyone will be happy, but it does ensure the majority is happy which is better than what we currently have going on. My idea gives more power to the people, which was the original purpose of both the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution.