Should the Federal government pay for policies that it mandates to states? Or should the responsibility of funding these policies come from the states? Ultimately the question at hand is this, is the body which mandates a policy, responsible to fund it’s policy or, should the beneficiary of the policy fund it?
By passing unfunded mandates such as the No Child Left Behind act, is the Federal government usurping the states power? Before we can ask this, we must ask, is the Government usurping power by passing laws regarding education? And, the answer is yes. The federal government is usurping the states power, by reaching beyond it’s enumerated powers, and violating the tenth amendment. no where’s in Article 1 section 8 “The Powers of Congress” in the Constitution does it speak of federally mandated education. And as stated in the tenth amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (The Constitution),. Since the federal government is not given power to mandate education, such responsibilities are left to the states. So just by implementing the NCLB (No Child Left Behind act) the Federal Government is unconstitutional, and usurping the states power.
Now putting aside the fact that some Federally mandated policies are unconstitutional, we will return to whether or not unfunded mandates are a usurpation of states power. Our first ten amendments known as ‘ “The Bill of Rights” lists rights guaranteed to the American people and, states. Though, it does not state, that states have a right to be absolved from unfunded Federal mandates, the ninth amendment has a very unique wording. “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” (Constitution) Forcing the states or people to pay for a federal policy is wrong, since the states and people already pay taxes to fund our government, why then should we be required to pay to fund a government, and also pay more separately to fund there policies which the government implements? One of our inalienable rights is that of property, you have the right to your money, the government has the right to tax us, however an unfunded mandate is not taxation, it is a form of legal plunder. A law that gives them right to use your already taxed money for their own purposes. Plunder is wrong, and legal plunder is just a usurpation of the States Power or right to there funds.
Aside from the constitutionality of some unfunded mandates and the fact that they usurp state powers there can be negative effect of unfunded federal mandates including the cost to states. “Hurson, who also serves as president of the National Conference of State Legislatures, said that federal regulations could wind up costing the states $30 billion in the fiscal 2006.” (Capital News Service) These astronomical costs to states, especially now in this time of economic trouble and unbalanced budgets are far from beneficial. In H.R.373 -- Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2011 Section 2, “Findings” sub-part 5, 6, and 7 shows further negative economic effects, “(5) the costs of private sector mandates are often borne in part by consumers, in the form of higher prices and reduced availability of goods and services;
(6) the costs of private sector mandates are often borne in part by workers, in the form of lower wages, reduced benefits, and fewer job opportunities; and
(7) the costs of private sector mandates are often borne in part by employers and small businesses, in the form of hiring disincentives and stunted economic growth.” (The Library of Congress). With such side effects as higher prices, lost wages, decrease in jobs, increased prices to employers and small businesses, and $30 billion cost to our states. I believe we can agree that unfunded mandates, reap a bad harvest.
Ultimately what is wrong with unfunded mandates? If they were constitutional, and if they did not have such large negative impacts, would they be all that bad? Fredrick Bastiat once said concerning legal plunder, "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it" Over time, this will become an acceptable act, legal plunder, and if stealing becomes acceptable, what else will become acceptable and glorified. So yes, the Federal Government, should pay for policies that it mandates, and let the states do with there funds as they see fit.
10/25/2011
References:
“Constitution” from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am5 2011
“Local governments struggle with unfunded federal mandates” By Megan McIlroy Capital News Service 3/31/2005, http://www.wtop.com/?nid=&sid=441088
The Library of Congress, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c112:1:./temp/~mdbsK6ULAU:: 2011.
Frederick Bastiat from http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/380618 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment