THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, January 1, 1995 TAG: 9412300034
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J4 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 57 lines
The meeting of Republican governors at Williamsburg adopted an outline of reforms presented by Gov. George Voinovich of Ohio. He makes the case for a new federalism.
Now, Washington too often dictates and the states must comply. For example, Congress provides money for substance-abuse programs but dictates that 35 percent must be directed to alcohol-abuse programs, 35 percent to drug programs and half of that amount to intravenous drug users. But what if New York has many intravenous drug abusers and North Dakota almost none? Never mind, one size fits all.
Then there are federal rules requiring the states to spend $1 billion by 1997 on an additive to highway pavement made of scrap tires. States are required to test water for substances long banned. The Clinton administration has encouraged states to deliver food stamps and other benefits electronically. But elaborate Federal Reserve regulations increase the hassle rather than decrease it.
By Voinovich's estimate, his state will have to spend $1.74 billion between 1992-95 to comply with federal mandates. Mandates will cost California $8 billion this year alone. And the nation's cities and counties will spend $88 billion over five years - about 25 percent of all local revenues.
To remedy the situation, the governors recommend several common sense reforms. First, the consolidation of funding into block grants. There are now 578 grant programs, and each has its own requirements and complicated rules.
The governors want more leeway for states to experiment on health and welfare reform without running afoul of federal regulations. The leaders of the new Republican Congress are sympathetic. They oppose unfunded mandates.
But the governors warn against some pet projects of congressional conservatives because of the consequences at the state level. A federal cap in entitlement spending has been proposed, but states know they'd probably be forced to take up the slack for Medicare patients.
The governors fear a balanced budget amendment might shift the burden to them. They warn that welfare reform could force states ``to develop massive public service employment programs.'' A Contract With America pledge to deny welfare to teenage mothers ``would saddle the states with billions of dollars in new costs.''
In short, the governors demonstrate the adage: once burned, twice shy. They wound up having to pay for many big government programs concocted at the federal level. Now that downsizing is in vogue, the governors worry that the feds will stick it to the states again.
Instead, the governors seek a cooperative attempt to find a way for the federal government to do less, the states to do what they do best and both to do it while living within their means. The new Congress should heed the governors' hard-won wisdom. by CNB