Regarding columnist Thomas Schaller's recent commentary, I was delighted to see a dedicated, self described liberal like him concede there was some merit in the idea of increasing states' rights as an antidote to the growing national political divide and legislative gridlock ("Adapting to a politically divided nation," March 18).
Unfortunately, Mr. Schaller failed to emphasize that this national disunity has grown worse under President Barack Obama's stewardship than under that of any prior administration. At the opposite extreme, note that John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, shared with conservatives of his day a passion for lowering taxes to stimulate the economy. Today he would be demonized by Mr. Schaller and those of like mind.
Mr. Schaller also failed to note the logical fallacy of excluding from states' rights some legislative areas like access to ballots or the wedding alter, which (for promoting left-wing agendas), he says, must be decided nationally.
Finally, Mr. Schaller is no doubt mindful that the largest electoral and most populous states are very Democratic and enjoy chronic one-party control. Accordingly, he can depend on them to maintain a proper statist perspective, even when the national government fails to do so. Not surprising, then, is his new-found affinity for states' rights.
Angelo Mirabella, Silver Spring-
To respond to this letter, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Please include your name and contact information.