LOCAL GOVERNMENT

State Legislatures

Prior to the 17th Amendment, the State Legislatures were the power centers of the nation. Today, they are little more than supplicants to and surrogates for the federal government. If this continues, in the not too distant future, they will be reduced to be no more than administrative offices for the federal bureaucracy.

It’s already dangerously near that point.

Before they can do anything, it has to be checked to assure no conflict with Federal Regulations which are written by bureaucrats, not enacted by Congress.

In theory, in 1996, by law, Congress could no longer pass on Unfunded Mandates to the States. The Bureaucrats have found a way around that. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law specifically provides that the States were not required to spend any of their own money to implement it.

On examination, Connecticut discovered its existing program had higher standards of accomplishment than did the outlined federal program. State Education Commissioner Betty Sternberg said, “They're actually telling us to, and I hate to use the word, but dumb down our test."

It would cost millions to implement it, but no additional funding came with it. The “solution,” as far as the bureaucracy was concerned, was simple, “Use some of the other federal money you are getting.” Which means, “Since we’re giving you money, it’s not yours that you are spending.”

Many states rebelled, but gradually many reported improvement in “achievement.” The tests had been dumbed down, which means more would score better.

But the law had a built-in, self defeating defect. Schools receive federal funds. If they don’t meet the goals of NCLB, they lose part or all of it. How do you protect the pocketbook? You “Teach to the test” which gives you more students passing and higher scores on the test, but definitely is not a measure of real achievement.

Bottom line: Not only do the Legislatures have federal bureaucrats looking over their shoulders, micromanaging everything they do, they have to spend so much to comply with federal regulations they are hard pressed to take care of what the State needs. Unfortunately, sometimes the only solution is to pass whatever they can on to the counties.

The Counties

As we go “down” the food chain, it just gets worse.

The National Association of Counties asked 30 Counties to provide their costs to comply with 10 federal unfunded mandates. The counties were not “cherry picked.” They were large and small, urban and rural. Because of accounting procedures, some could not provide accurate figures. However, when the numbers provided were extended across the entire nation, the reported figures amounted to an average of $5 million per county per year. There are 3,066 counties.

Above, we said the Legislatures have bureaucrats looking over their shoulder. That’s mainly at the policy level. When we get down to the counties, it’s hands on and the area suffering the most are the schools which are almost buried under a mountain of federal regulations.

Municipalities

Here’s where the micromanagement is so severe as to be almost personal. One example, one out of hundreds, if not thousands, demonstrates the problems the cities are having with the ever growing mountain of federal regulations.

1. Gadsden, Alabama: Once a month the Water Department back-flushes their filters and then dump the rinse water into the Coosa River. Problem: This water contained .o6 parts per million (ppm) of chlorine which was above the EPA standard of .044 ppm for water discharged into a river.

The city was forced to spend $1.5 million to build a pumping station and a pipeline to send it seven miles to the city’s sewage disposal plant. But once it got there, it was classified as sewage and the chlorine level had to be raised to .1ppm in order to kill bacteria before it could be dumped into the Coosa River.

Why It Happens Like This

Analysis On The News “Is it simply stupidity, miscommunication or bad management? None of these, say students of the problem. There is a clear method to the seeming madness.

‘The reason so much decision-making has been moved to Washington is because that's the way bureaucrats and public policy groups want it,’ says Roger Pilon, director of the Center for Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute. ‘Over the past 40 years, a huge army of central planners has come to Washington, become ensconced in the political branches, and is now seeking to impose its vision of the good society upon the country.’

Public policy groups also support the trend for three important reasons:

* You don't have to run 50 different campaigns to get things through legislatures.

* Any rule made in Washington trumps state law, giving people with influence in Washington enormous leverage.

* You don't run into grass-roots opposition in Washington.

Says Pilon: ‘The political feedback mechanism to the Capitol is so uncertain and attenuated that interest groups can leverage their activities in Washington, knowing full well that the costs and, inconveniences that fall on local taxpayers are unlikely to translate into political repercussions.’”

Note: As noted by the author, the branches of government are not “political” The manner in which they are wrongfully used by Presidents, Congress or the Bureaucrats may be in pursuit of a political purpose, but the branches themselves are a part of the technical structure of government.

Bottom line: Throughout the Municipality to County to State government, you will find very few, if any, who will object to what the federal government is trying to accomplish. The frustration and anger is directed at how it is done. Over and over the local governments are forced to spend huge sums of money to accomplish little or nothing. The core of the situation dwells with the “One Size Fits All” mindset of the DC centered bureaucrats. It has to be done their way when local organizations could develop and implement better solutions at far less cost.

* * * *

Next stop is Business