A lot of people are concerned about the Health Care Reform law that congress recently passed. I have heard people say that it is the end of our republic as we know it. To me, it’s just another step in the slow progression towards federal control of our life. It’s nothing more or nothing less. It seems to me that whenever the federal government funds an activity, they also end up deciding how you get to do that activity. A couple of examples of this federal control are funding for highways and funding for education. I see no reason that federal government for health care will end up any different.
Highway funding
From 1974-1995, the Federal Government controlled how fast you can go on freeways. If your state posted speed limits above 55, the federal government would withhold transportation funding for your state. In Nevada, they tested that law by posting a 70 mph sign. They found that the feds were serious and were willing to stop giving the State of Nevada millions of dollars of federal money for road repair and other transportation needs. Recently, Senator Chuck Schumer introduced a bill that would strip federal transportation funding from states that did not have a texting while driving law. Now, I am not against a law like that, but I don’t see any provision in the Constitution granting permission for the federal government to pass that kind of law. It’s up to the states to make that kind of safety law. Federal funds= federal control.
Education Funding
Funding for public schools is important, right? I agree that education is extremely important, but is it best served by funding from the federal government? With federal funding comes federal regulations such as No Child Left Behind. I have met quite a few teachers who HATE that law. I have heard that if schools don’t meet the standards, then federal funding gets cut. Again federal funds=federal control.
Health Care Funding
Now we have a Health Insurance reform bill. Everybody will get covered, but I hear the price tag is almost 1 Billion dollars over 10 years. My understanding is that half (500 billion) of that will come from Medicare and half from new taxes. What will come with this new federal money? If past experience is any indicator, I predict that more federal regulations and control will come along with that federal money. After all, federal funds= federal control.
You’ve touched upon how the Fed has insidiously undermined States Rights for decades.The Federal Interstate commercial clause is one method of controlling free trade from one state to another.The Feds taxation of US citizens reduces the money the States could have received from those citizens spending within the states.
Unfunded mandates like NCLB sapped the States coffers trying fulfill it. Federal programs give the states white elephants that required more taxes to feed. Over time,the states become broke and beholden to the Feds, losing their sovereignty.
It is very much like the tradition where a king would visit his fellow dukes and barons. They would go broke hosting the king and his train of followers–which was the king’s intention to keep them in line and from becoming too powerful.
Makes one appreciate why the BYU refused Federal money, so it would not have to dance to the tune of the Federal government
Is the Federal government to blame for their increased control, or State legislatures that have invited it?
“I hear the price tag is almost 1 Billion dollars over 10 years…”
Trillion?
That’s not the only problem with the article. Have someone proofread, friend.
Skyler, I would blame the increased federal control on the states losing control of the Senate. Senators were originally elected by state legislatures and beholden to the states’ interests. After the 17th Amendment, senators are directly elected by the people. So the main source of the problem is that the states don’t have an institutional check on the federal government.
Tertium, point well taken. I will have someone proofread next time.
Don’t Constitutional amendments have their origin in the States? It seems more of a “we’ve gotten what we’ve asked for” dilemma.
FYI – If any edits/corrections need to be made to the article you can simply log in and do that: http://www.ldsfreemen.com/wp-login.php
You are correct that Constitutional Amendments need to be ratified by 3/4th of the either the state legislatures or state conventions.- Article V of Constitution. The 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, 20 years before the new deal and what I would consider the modern expansion of the Federal Government. So I wouldn’t blame the states at that time for not foreseeing the growth of the federal government and the importance of having Senators representing the states against encroaching federal power. Maybe somebody made that argument, but I don’t believe that the federal government was that big in 1913 compared to today.
I didn’t see the Federal government’s control over the Church via its corporate status and 501c3 filing mentioned.
Is that not worth mentioning?
Well Fed intervention could blow off some covers