>>99840050>>99840050>>99839943>>99839887>>99839862>>99839775Little would really change. Almost immediately after the foundin of the new government back in the 1790s, there were already debates and interpretations of the government, some of which came from the very founders themselves. The Constitution really is, at its base, a living and changing document, and for good reason. It needs to be in order to adapt to the changing times and conditions that the country might meet, and laying out a strict list of "dos and don'ts" was one of the things the founders were trying to avoid. Article 1, Section 8's Necessary and Proper Clause was an example of this, and has been interpreted and reasoned through the decades by men of law and government much smarter than the collective knowledge and intelligence of everyone in this thread.
>>99840050The Whiskey Rebellion, to be sure, was a response to a federal tax. And it's not like Washington didn't also request aid from several neighboring states. Remember, another concern regarding the Constitution was to fix the Articles of Confederation's weak federal government. The new federal government needed teeth and real power in rder to properly govern the various states. Now, whether the federal government today has overreached its bounds and grown too much in the past 200 years or so is completely up to debate, and one that many contend is a problem, so there is that.
