[heavymark]

A problem with each state doing their own thing, is then the state can take away human rights, and wealthly people can simply move, less privileged people may be unable to. Of course the constitution is suppose to help with that by requiring all states treat everyone equally but of course they couldn't predict everything and states can simply interpret it as they see fit, so the federal government is needed, but how much is anyones guess. I don't see that de-polarizing america, rather just would be more silencing those in the minority of each state.

[sampo]

> A problem with each state doing their own thing, is then the state can take away human rights

(1) Why would the state residents vote for a state legislature that takes away human rights from them?

(2) And if this is seen as a real danger, can it not happen as well on the federal level then? The whole US of A voters voting for representatives that take away human rights on the federal level.

[pjc50]

Many important rights were never voted in at all. Interracial marriage was legalized not by electorates but by the Supreme Court. Desegregation of education had to be imposed on several states by federal troops.

At the federal level, the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_th... is an example of a right that has never yet been implemented, partly because some states insisted on retaining the death penalty for children.

[barryp]

> (1) Why would the state residents vote for a state legislature that takes away human rights from them?

A lot of voters wouldn't have a problem if they're going to take rights away from those "other people" they don't like.

[throw0101a]

> (1) Why would the state residents vote for a state legislature that takes away human rights from them?

(a) That assumes they get to vote: see voter suppression.

(b) Plenty of folks vote for things that are against their own interests:

> Working-class Americans who voted for Donald J. Trump continue to approve of him as president, even though he supported a health care bill that would disproportionately hurt them.

* https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/12/upshot/why-americans-vote...

* https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/05/why-working-...

* https://thehill.com/opinion/james-carville/227350-james-carv...

[nerdponx]

1) Hard to say why, but they do. It maybe comes down to "politics over policy".

2) This also happens, but it's a bit harder because you need a wider variety of people to agree, and federal-level politics get a lot more visibility in the news.

Consider that referenda are generally uncommon and that you have to vote for a whole politician, not individual policies.

[xboxnolifes]

Same argument can be made for federal government. Why are local governments more likely to take away human rights than a federal one?