Reader Forum
New federalism and devolution

"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." -- 10th Amendment, Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution

Of all the monumental debates this country is engaged in, there is one underlying debate which is setting the tone for everything else. That debate is about the proper role of government.

Ever since the '30s, the Marxist notion that history is a long march to the left has seemed to be the prevailing ideology. More and more power was co-opted by the federal government in order to create legislative and regulatory solutions to society's ills. Herbert Hoover's conservatives, the progressives said, were to be dragged ''kicking and screaming into the 20th century."

This is the view held, on one side of this great debate, by liberals today. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, these modern-day socialists still believe that one-size-fits-all big government solutions, fed by bunches of taxpayer money and growing deficits, are the way to fix the nation's many problems. Their motto: "Where there's a bureaucracy, there's a way." If anyone doubts this, just look at Hillary's recent attempt to commandeer the health care industry.

On the other side of the coin is the current movement toward devolution, or the sending of programs back to the states, localities and the private sector. This process goes hand-in-hand with the federalism (separation of powers between the local, state and federal governments) originally intended by the framers of the Constitution.

It is this concept, which is further clarified and enhanced in the 10th Amendment, that conservatives embrace. Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole even carries a copy of this amendment around with him as a reminder of this move toward decentralization.

Conservatives believe and support the idea that citizens and local communities, not Washington bureaucrats, are better able to define and address problems if given the freedom to do so. Unfortunately, the last 60 years have seen a deliberate disregard of the 10th Amendment by the federal government. Not only is this bad on constitutional grounds, but it also has resulted in Americans absolving themselves of their civic responsibilities and turning them over to the federal government.

Nevertheless, the results of Nov. 8 signify a move away from the big government of the past and shows a desire by America's citizens to reclaim their civic duties.

The state houses, 60 percent of which now have Republican governors, seem more than happy to accept this increased responsibility. Even Democratic governors acknowledge that today's conservative Congress is more likely to grant them increased leeway in formulating policy.

The march to the left has come to an abrupt halt and there no longer remains any sound arguments on behalf of socialism. But can this devolution of power back to the people actually begin to cure our problems?

In a way, much progress is already being made. Governors throughout the country have already made great strides in reviving their state's economies. They are cutting taxes while boosting revenue, privatizing services, reforming welfare and downsizing government; all while still managing to balance their budgets.

But that isn't even the most promising and exciting aspect of this new federalism. By proceeding with the transfer of programs to the states in the form of block grants, much experimentation can take place. Imagine, we could possibly have 50 different welfare experiments (and education, health care and any number of other experiments) going on at the same time. In this way, the states can learn from each other in order to come up with the best and most efficient programs.

Of course, the squeals from the arrogant elitists in Washington will be deafening. In fact, they already are. A perfect example is the current controversy over the free school lunch program. They claim that the cold-hearted GOP is making drastic cuts in this program and is in effect "stealing food from the mouths of needy children." Never mind the fact that the school lunch program is actually going to increase in funding by 4.5 percent, which, by the way, is more than the 3.1 percent increase that President Clinton proposed in his budget.

Also, when you take into account all of the fraud and bureaucracy that will be eliminated, this increase shall be more than enough to offset need. The real worry for the liberal defenders of the old order is that the programs will be given to the states, which are closer to the people. This then deprives the liberals of their bureaucratic power base and their arrogant notion that only they know how to solve society's ills.

What is it that makes them think that they know better than the governors and mayors and state and local legislators? Or more importantly, how can these people, who sit on their pedestals from afar, possibly know better than the people who actually make this country work: the businessmen, farmers, doctors and educators of this country? The liberals are out of touch and it is pathetically amusing to watch them finally going down, kicking and screaming all the way.

Each and every community in this nation has distinctive sets of problems and needs. The last 60 years saw Washington-based bureaucracies, with their on-size-fits-all solutions, fail miserably in addressing them.

As Michael Barone of U.S. News & World Report explains, "the tide that has been running towards Washington for nearly a century is beginning to run out." All I can add is, it's about time.