fbpx
10.31.2019 0

Congress can do more to limit federal intrusion into state and local matters

Can federalism survive? It’s up to Congress.
http://dailytorch.com/2019/10/can-federalism-survive-its-up-to-congress/

Under the original Constitution, and even with its subsequent amendments, power was supposed to be distributed between the federal and state and local governments, with the idea that the national government would have the fewest powers to affect local administration except in certain areas. And so, the federal government was tasked with regulating interstate and foreign commerce, creating uniform immigration laws, building roads, bridges and the like, post offices, intellectual property laws, establishing courts, ensuring the national defense and so forth. Those are all Article 1, Section 8 powers under the Constitution. Those powers not articulated were granted to the states under the 10th Amendment. But one big advantage the federal government and Congress have is the power to spend and borrow money on the credit of the United States and to print money. States cannot do that, and so with the limitless power of the purse, the federal government has been able to progressively expand control over state and local governments by attaching terms and conditions to federal funding. But just because the federal government can do something under the Constitution, does not mean it ought to. Instead, it could pass laws denying funds limiting federal intrusions into local matters. An obvious example is Congress defunding implementation of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing regulation that sought to condition community development block grants on making changes to local zoning along income and racial guidelines. Other times, Congress may wish to compel state and local cooperation, for example, in the implementation of federal immigration laws. Where do you draw the line?

Copyright © 2008-2025 Americans for Limited Government