Skip to comments.50% Believe Fed Government Has Too Much Influence Over States, 11% Say Not Enough
Posted on 08/25/2011 10:47:55 AM PDT by markomalley
Americans overall tend to trust governments closer to home rather than the federal government and worry that the team in DC has too much influence over state governments. However, Democrats and those who are politically liberal take an entirely different view.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 50% of Likely Voters believe the federal government has too much influence over state governments. Just 11% think the federal government does not have enough influence while 26% believe the balance is about right. Thirteen percent (13%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
On the question of which branch of government does a better job, 33% pick local governments, 23% look to the state level, and 15% prefer the federal government. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are not sure.
These results come at a time when just 17% believe the federal government has the consent of the governed and only 14% believe the country is generally heading in the right direction.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Psychologically many blacks moved from one plantation to another. I believe the percent of blacks is 14%.
Then the great depression hit. FDR's "new deal" was known as "alphabet soup" because its record number of government agencies was unprecedented in American history. After enacting his socialist agenda, he received well over 80% of the vote in much of the so-called "conservative, limited-government" south, more so than anywhere else in the country.
A bunch of "our Republic is dead" freepers have claimed Abraham Lincoln "destroyed" our Republic in 1865, but then they also claim our Republic was "destroyed" in 1913. How was it "destroyed" in 1913 if Lincoln already killed it 48 years earlier? You guys might have more credibility if you could come up with a consensus date and stick with it.
By the way, Ronald Reagan (also from Illinois) was a huge fan of honest Abe and considered him a role model. His ancestors fought on Lincoln's side, not on the side of the "save slavery" fascist confederacy.
Warren Harding repelled the USAs first dance with Communism ushered in by Woodrow Wilson..
Warren Harding figured it out in 1920...
Congress and the Executive Branch have lots to do.
So far theyre not doin it right..
Its been done before..
Harding cut the governments budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Hardings approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third. The Federal Reserves activity, moreover, was hardly noticeable. As one economic historian puts it, Despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction. 2 By the late summer of 1921, signs of recovery were already visible. The following year, unemployment was back down to 6.7 percent and was only 2.4 percent by 1923.
BTW..ole Warren ALSO fixed immigration...
Mr. Harding signed into law the Emergency Quota Act which sought to control immigration following World War I and preserve the distinctive American culture by ensuring the majority of immigrants came from the historically compatible cultures of Northern Europe. This law aimed to bring wages of hard working Americans under control by limiting immigration to 3% of the 1910 census. It was followed on by a similar act in 1924, after Mr. Hardings death.
A Warren Harding prescription...if filled ...would ignite the afterburners on the US job machine and the economy. However DC would have to yield on a tremendous amount of power. Our job as We the People...is to persuade them of the utility ..shall we say..of doing so. In all probability the same minds that made the mess...arent capable of the solution however.
BTW any takers that Bammy couldnt even tell you that Warren Harding was one of his predecessors in office?
Even more telling about what our betters in the RinoCracy think of a Constitutional President..
I've probably typed "succession" by mistake at least half of the times I meant to type "secession". ;d
I’ve become a big “fan” so to speak of Harding.
A bit of corruption is his administration doesn’t change the fact that all but 2 IMO (Coolidge, Reagan) of his successors as President make him look like he belongs on Mount Rushmore. He’s certainly no where near “worst” if you are looking at it from the perspective of a conservative and not a liberal historian.
As for Lincoln, I’m not a big fan of some of his polices but he had about as good an excuse as exists with the Civil war. Terrible time but most historians think it was unavoidable.
You should have Woodrow Wilson and FDR’s picture’s up there Central_va. No comparison between Lincoln and those twerps.
Just the other day I replied to some sophomoric idiot’s blog post saying how Lincoln would be happy Obama is President. We should make an effort to put a stop to the far-left’s co-opting of Lincoln. When I was a kid I went to the Chicago Historical society and the bint giving the tour was talking about Lincoln and Douglas and said today their parties would be reversed. She worked in a Historical society despite having a middle schooler’s sense of history.