The States or the Fed - Local vs Central

[TGHusker]

To begin with, this thread isn't a bash the Fed threat but is meant to be a discussion on efficiency and effectiveness of govt.

It has been said that the most efficent (in meeting the needs of the governed) is the local govt. Thus the more local the govt, the better at identification of need and helping the needy.

For example in the area of education - I think most of us would agree that the local school board has a better understanding of the needs of their students than Washington DC.

 

Our gov't was set up as a Federal Govt - a shared power between states and what was to be a limited, but yet still powerful central govt. Note: under the article of confederation we had a limited and powerless central govt. I believe we have evolved or de-volved (not a word I know) to a point where we now have an all powerful central govt and very weak and limited state govts. I think this hurts us in a number of ways: 1. Local knows its population the best and their needs 2. We become less efficient in the use of available $$s to meet the need - greater levels of administration. 3. The greater concentration of power in the hands of fewer people in central govt - lends itself to corruption (regardless of party) and authoritarism.

 

The benefit of the central gov't cannot be dimished however. They can provide leadership via laws, so that all people in all regions are treated equally (civil rights laws, etc). They can provide the needed services for the common good - defense, monetary policy, etc - those big picture things.

 

As we discuss our large federal debt, I wonder if we could downsize the federal gov't considerably by doing away wt certain depts and merging other and transfering the responsibility to the states. The Fed could provide finances to assist the states in the functions once done by central planners in DC. It would seem that the more local option would be more cost efficient and drive more $$s directly to the need vs overhead. While those of us on this board don't have the power, I thought it might be a fun mental exercise to determine how we would restructure govt.

 

My suggestion:

 

Do away with Education, HUD, Health and Human Services, Labor, and Agriculture. Move those responsibilities to the states. Funding for those programs can come from the Fed wt general guidelines to promote equality, rights, etc. Maybe create one "Domestic" dept to oversee fed money going to the states for these issues.

Merge: Commerce, Transportation, Energy into one agency. They are all related in some degree.

Merge: Homeland security under defense

Keep these as they now are as they are all established for the overal comnon good and cannot be done properly by the individual states.

State

Treasury

Defense

Attorney General (remove Holder but that is another story )

Interior - since we have large land holdings by the fed govt

 

Ok, you can now destroy or support my ideas or come up with other solutions that would streamline the system - driving efficiencies into govt services, cutting out waste, but maintaining or actually improving services.

[Someone]

Kansas passed a law that says federal gun laws don't apply to guns in KS, so the 2nd ammendment doesn't apply in Kansas now that the Gov signed the bill.

 

Odd.