America's Future
Now that Washington is making them pay for the ride, state governments have decided that they want to get off the federal gravy train.
by F.R. Duplantier
Unfunded mandates. That's what the uproar's about. It seems the federal government is imposing more and more obligations on state governments without providing the funds necessary to pay for them, and so the states have to come up with the money themselves. Having to raise millions of dollars to comply with federal regulations, or divert funds from their own programs, does not sit well with state officials. It's patently unfair, and it's unconstitutional. But, in the short run, it may be a good thing. After all, the states raised few objections as long as federal mandates were fully funded, and they might never have complained if they hadn't felt the pinch.
How did the states get themselves into this fix? Thomas Atwood and Chris West of the Heritage Foundation explain: "States succumb to the temptation of federal funds and buy into a program; the people and the state become dependent on it; Congress changes the rules of the game; and the state is directed actually to change its law or even its constitution in order to continue receiving the popular funding. Strings-attached programs can lead to the federal government's virtually dictating state law. Yet, all too often, states have been quick to bargain away their autonomy in pursuit of federal dollars."
Complying with the dictates of the federal government used to be seen as "a small price to pay for federal funding of popular state-implemented programs," say Atwood and West. "But now the federal share of that funding is decreasing while the mandates are becoming more numerous, complex, and expensive. Unfunded federal mandates and highly prescriptive federal programs have backed many states and localities into a fiscal corner, forcing them to sacrifice their own programs and priorities in order to comply with standards set by a distant federal government."
Now, at long last, state officials are "challenging the authority of the federal government to impose these mandates, whether funded or not." They're monitoring the votes of their Congressmen on mandates. They're challenging the federal government's ever-widening interpretation of the Constitution's Commerce Clause. They're accusing the federal government of violating the Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the states and the people all powers not expressly delegated to the federal government. And, on occasion, they're just plain refusing to comply.
Atwood and West warn that "the centralization of power in Washington threatens to smother America's enterprise and liberty." But the battle is joined, and the tide may be turning. "The states have the power, the authority, the opportunity, and the responsibility to rein in an out-of-control federal government," say Atwood and West. All they need now is the will to assert themselves, and the determination to stick to their guns.
Behind The Headlines is syndicated, free of charge, by America's Future, a nonprofit educational organization dedicated to the preservation of our free-enterprise system and our constitutional form of government. For more information, write:
America's Future