For years the Republicans have been champions of Federalism and the Democrats have been trying to have the Federal Government bring the States into national conformity. Now that Republicans control Congress and judicial nominees, we are likely to see those who favor and oppose Federalism switch sides.

The Republicans seem to be more aggressive at consolidating their new found power than Democrats are in holding onto theirs. For example, ramming through redistricting off cycle in Texas. Another example is the threat of the "Nuclear Option" underscores that collegiality and continuity are not more important to the current Republican leadership than partisan interests.

The Supreme Court is also moving in that direction and will do so decisively once there are a few more Republican appointees on the Court. Conditional federal spending like the No Child Left Behind Act largely invalidate any state independence of the sort granted in Lopez which lined out criminal, education and family law as provinces of the States. (I am surprised that no state has made it a felony to be a three-term Senator. That would test whether criminal law really is something a state can do and potentially allow term limits for federal officials to move forward.)

As red state policy becomes federal law, it will be more and more difficult for blue states to maintain their independent policies. There is a narrow window while Republican legislators and the Republican judiciary has not fully internalized the polarity switch. During this time, Democrats can try to cement Federalism before Republicans realize they no longer need this issue.

My guess is that the time for Federalism has passed and that Democrats will convert to Federalism more slowly than Republicans convert away from it. I look forward to reading how the Supreme Court Justices and some of the more self-important partisan publications will justify their newly-found interests in the opposite sides of the Federalism debate.

The issue of federal term limits was answered years ago. Colorado enacted term limits on all of it's state and federal elected officials (via voter initiative, of course), but the federal courts knocked down the federal restrictions, saying that Colorado could not change the requirements for office listed in the Constitution, nor add any new requirements.

Sad, but true.

Want federalism to get some teeth back in it? Repeal the 17th Amendment.

As a life-long republican, it is this aspect of "Bushism" and the current congressional republicans that infuriates me more than any other. That the democrats are intent on committing political suicide through the pursuit of ideological purity only contributes to the problem.

Many of us (including the author, I suspect) are republicans because we believe in limited government, especially a limited national government. As soon as the republicans got the levers of control, they have pursued power and a national political agenda over the past 5 years with the same avarice that the democrats showed for the previous 35 years.

My politics are a little hard to pin down. I like elements of the Republican agenda like an outward and forward looking space policy, social security privatization, low taxes, promotion of freedom abroad and deficit spending. I like elements of the Democrat agenda like free trade, habeas corpus, electronic freedom, emission permit trading, carbon awareness, not pinning our hopes of energy security on hydrogen, and stem cell research. My main issue is space colonization which is being embraced by no party yet. I may have to start my own.

I do claim to have elected Bush in 2000 by a decisive donation in the late days of the Nader campaign.

John: election of a Senator was stricken down on narrow grounds. Time to test it with a power reserved to the states under Lopez--criminal law. Make it a felony to run for Senate a third time. It wouldn't be the first time a crook was elected to Senate.