Federal Government Should Let States Decide Certain Things

[Clementine]

The federal government should get out of the states' business on many things. This is just one example.

Central planning doesn't work because the feds have no idea what each state needs. We elect our own state and local representatives for this stuff. We have a huge problem with bridges and roads needing repair, but the federal government forces states to waste millions on other projects. How about we address the most serious problems first, then worry about buying pretty streetlamps? This has been going on a long time and I don't know whose idea it was, but it's stupid.

States collect federal gas taxes and send them to Washington, D.C. The federal government pools this money, applies complex formulas to divvy it up, then sends a portion back to each state. These “formula funds” come with myriad caveats. One of them: Set aside 2 percent to pay for the Transportation Alternatives Program.

TAP includes projects such as sidewalks, streetlamps, bicycle paths and beautification—activities that are not inherently low-value, but that should not be federal priorities, either. Every dollar of TAP money that must be set aside means one less dollar the states have to pay for their road and bridge improvement projects. Pennsylvania, for example, must set aside $27.5 million for TAP in fiscal year 2014, meaning it has $27.5 million less to pay for maintenance and repairs to its 5,218 deficient bridges.

TAP illustrates how the federal government intrudes on what should be state-by-state or local decisions. “There is nothing federal or highway about bicycle paths, landscaping or any of these local activities,” Heritage transportation expert Emily Goff writes.

Historic-Style Street Lamps: Your Federal Gas Tax Dollars at Work

 

[Sallow]

Um..

The Federal government should turn over federal taxes to the state?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Federal Government Should Let States Decide Certain Things

The states are at liberty to decide many things provided those decisions comport with the Federal Constitution and its case law.

And when the state enact measures repugnant to the Federal Constitution, those measures are invalidated by Federal courts in accordance with Article VI of the Federal Constitution.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We tried this per-consitution.

We need critical thought and common sense. Moderates all the way in 2014, 2016!

 

[TheOldSchool]

We tried this per-consitution.

We need critical thought and common sense. Moderates all the way in 2014, 2016!

Moderates Matty? You mean black hating moderates right?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Crime hating moderates! Remember, Blacks enjoy being racist as they damn well please.

We need common sense and intelligence to take over again!

 

[Clementine]

Funny that some just obey whatever the government says without question. No wonder this country is such a mess.

States collect gas tax money, which is meant to be used to maintain roads and bridges. The government makes the states send the money to them, then they decide how to divide the money and they force states to spend millions on stuff that doesn't help maintain roads and bridges. States have dangerous dilapidated bridges and yet they have to spend millions on street lamps and fancy sidewalks. It's stupid. It would be like going to the doctor with 3 broken bones and the government says they can only fix two broken bones and the person has to get a facelift.

The states know better where the money for roads and bridges needs to be spent and it's just crazy that they have to waste so much on things that aren't needed. People have to drive on the dangerous bridges and roads, but states can't fix them because the government thought bike trails or landscaping downtown were more important.

The federal government is often stupid. This is a great example of that. Let the states decide where to spend the money collected from gas taxes and other things. The feds are in no position to tell them what to do on certain things.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The states know better where the money for roads and bridges needs to be spent and it's just crazy that they have to waste so much on things that aren't needed. People have to drive on the dangerous bridges and roads, but states can't fix them because the government thought bike trails or landscaping downtown were more important.

Visit South Carolina sometime. The problems with your argument will be completely exposed.

 

[Clementine]

The states know better where the money for roads and bridges needs to be spent and it's just crazy that they have to waste so much on things that aren't needed. People have to drive on the dangerous bridges and roads, but states can't fix them because the government thought bike trails or landscaping downtown were more important.

Visit South Carolina sometime. The problems with your argument will be completely exposed.

No they won't. States know better what really needs fixing. It is stupid to force them to spend millions on things that are less important than safety.

In the Midwest, we have lots of old bridges that need repair, yet there was a big focus on beautification projects for downtown areas. We had to get fancy street lamps, benches, sidewalks and bike trails, but the bridges are still dangerous. It defies logic, but the states can't argue because the feds already made the rules and they don't care that their rules lack common sense.

The feds don't have a clue what the conditions of the roads in rural areas look like, yet they still force states to spend money for cosmetic purposes.

If it turns out that Bush started this, will you change your tune? I think the federal government has outstepped it's bounds in numerous ways and they need to back off.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The states know better where the money for roads and bridges needs to be spent and it's just crazy that they have to waste so much on things that aren't needed. People have to drive on the dangerous bridges and roads, but states can't fix them because the government thought bike trails or landscaping downtown were more important.

Visit South Carolina sometime. The problems with your argument will be completely exposed.

Massachusetts is a textbook example of his point: there are 400+ bridges in the state that are basically ready to collapse. There are 2600+ that are sound, but inadequate. There are only about 5100 bridges in the damn STATE! Yet, they are spending a fortune building Taj Mahal-inspired MBTA stations and are trying to build commuter rail lines that nobody will ride. They recently replaced most of the transit buses and a bunch of trolleys. (Note: the new trolleys had MORE downtime than the 25+ year old ones they replaced.) It's not that the money isn't there...it's that so much of it is just WASTED!

 

[OKTexas]

The states should just spend the money the way they want, there was a big win in the maobamacare decision that the feds can not withhold funds from states to force them to comply with federal mandates, this can apply to many programs the feds are trying to micro manage.