The New Federalism
Whether by design or default, and while you were looking the other way, George Bush has given the United States the biggest change in our national thinking since Franklin Roosevelt. During the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt increased the role of the Federal Government, and it came to be looked upon as the ultimate problem solver for the national ills. That idea continued over the next 60 years as the Federal spending and bureaucracy continued to grow. Yes, it even grew through the years of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, both ostensibly conservative Republicans who talked a good game, but paid more lip service than action in limiting the size of the Federal Government.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, doesn't say much. But his actions, or inactions, speak plenty. For many years, I viewed his behavior as a total lack of leadership. But then a series of events began to happen which individually don't mean much, but taken together, show a major shift in power from the Federal Government back to the States. History will mark the Bush administration as the birth of The New Federalism. Bush is quietly implementing the blue print of Ronald Reagan.
The failure of the Federal government to act on many issues has caused the States to take up the slack and act on their own. Maine, Hawaii, and Massachusetts have developed their own universal health care plans. Iowa, through a major state push for the refining of ethanol, has declared that it, as a state, wants to be energy independent. California has a long tradition of setting environmental standards which set the tone for the rest of the country. The hurricane prone Gulf States are looking to Florida to see how the States should deal with local disasters. Along the Mexican border, it is the local counties that are taking the lead in protecting our borders.
At long last this country is waking up to the reality that the Federal Government is not always the answer to the problems that we face. Bigger does not mean better. Some things are best governed on a smaller scale with meaningful local input to satisfy the widely divergent needs within this country. What works in New Hampshire might not work in Ohio. In the upcoming gubernatorial election in Ohio, I want to ask the candidates what plans they have for health care for the citizens for Ohio. What are their plans for energy independence for Ohio?
Increasing the role of the individual states brings the democratic process closer to the people. It allows for manageable programs without bureaucratic waste. It makes all of us more responsible for our lives. And the good news is that the states seem to be willing to step up to the plate.
Looking over the past 6 years of the Bush administration, his actions point to three broad themes of his presidency: 1) Use of American muscle to make the Arab world sit up and take notice; 2) The North American continent as free trade zone with no tariffs and a free flow of labor and goods between the countries; and 3) Increased responsibility for States in the life of the country. These are important changes. Think this way, and what Bush has done, and what he has not done, begins to make perfect sense. That is a scary thought.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, doesn't say much. But his actions, or inactions, speak plenty. For many years, I viewed his behavior as a total lack of leadership. But then a series of events began to happen which individually don't mean much, but taken together, show a major shift in power from the Federal Government back to the States. History will mark the Bush administration as the birth of The New Federalism. Bush is quietly implementing the blue print of Ronald Reagan.
The failure of the Federal government to act on many issues has caused the States to take up the slack and act on their own. Maine, Hawaii, and Massachusetts have developed their own universal health care plans. Iowa, through a major state push for the refining of ethanol, has declared that it, as a state, wants to be energy independent. California has a long tradition of setting environmental standards which set the tone for the rest of the country. The hurricane prone Gulf States are looking to Florida to see how the States should deal with local disasters. Along the Mexican border, it is the local counties that are taking the lead in protecting our borders.
At long last this country is waking up to the reality that the Federal Government is not always the answer to the problems that we face. Bigger does not mean better. Some things are best governed on a smaller scale with meaningful local input to satisfy the widely divergent needs within this country. What works in New Hampshire might not work in Ohio. In the upcoming gubernatorial election in Ohio, I want to ask the candidates what plans they have for health care for the citizens for Ohio. What are their plans for energy independence for Ohio?
Increasing the role of the individual states brings the democratic process closer to the people. It allows for manageable programs without bureaucratic waste. It makes all of us more responsible for our lives. And the good news is that the states seem to be willing to step up to the plate.
Looking over the past 6 years of the Bush administration, his actions point to three broad themes of his presidency: 1) Use of American muscle to make the Arab world sit up and take notice; 2) The North American continent as free trade zone with no tariffs and a free flow of labor and goods between the countries; and 3) Increased responsibility for States in the life of the country. These are important changes. Think this way, and what Bush has done, and what he has not done, begins to make perfect sense. That is a scary thought.
Comments
»
»