The plan would result in domination of the country by special interests.
It might. there might be some argument if the company is picky over the installation of it. If it was there when you moved in the building owner has to deal with it.
Civil Enginerr. :) A+
Yes it was.
Because if you don't follow the codes, your project will either be taken from you by the government or demolished.
The articles of confederation gave almost no power to the federal government. They had to ask the states to get anything done. It was not working for building a country. They met and created the US Constitution.
The plan would result in domination of the country by special interests.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
State governments could not do the job well on their own.
The Democratic Party historically argued against federal investment in transportation systems on the grounds of states' rights and the belief that such projects should be managed at the state or local level, rather than by the federal government. They contended that federal involvement could lead to overreach and inefficiency, undermining the autonomy of states. Additionally, some Democrats expressed concerns about the potential for increased debt and government spending that could arise from large federal projects. This stance was often rooted in a preference for limited government intervention in the economy.
Nepotism has no democratic advantage as it is favourtism shown to relatives, particularly in government posts
US in WW2