logo
Contributor: As the feds abdicate responsibilities, states should band together

Contributor: As the feds abdicate responsibilities, states should band together

Yahooa day ago

Until January, the federal government and the states had a mutually beneficial and straightforward deal: The federal government prioritized challenges requiring national solutions — e.g., national security, natural and public-health disaster relief, managing the American economy. For their part, the states delivered primarily local goods and services — Medicaid and Medicare, much of our transportation infrastructure, public education.
Money, specifically taxpayer money, underpinned this deal. In 2023, the federal government collected about $4.7 trillion in taxes, sending back about $4.6 trillion to the states, mainly via social service programs. (The remainder of that year's roughly $6 trillion in federal spending was mostly financed by debt.)
Now, this deal between Washington and the states is unraveling to tragic effect.
In May, tornados ravaged communities in Kentucky and Missouri, killing 27 people. Because of cuts to the federal government in recent months, the National Weather Service is now stretched too thin to alert rural communities in the heartland about such deadly weather. Ordinarily, after such disasters, the feds could be counted on to provide relief. That too is far from a certainty. When natural disaster strikes — as it did in Arkansas this year in the form of severe storms and tornadoes — federal aid was initially denied and ultimately arrived weeks late. Similar aid was denied to those in West Virginia, Washington state and North Carolina. Meanwhile, normal and emergency disbursements to states and localities are being withheld or threatened explicitly because the administration dislikes a state's LGBTQ+-friendly policies or immigrant healthcare.
We are just a little over four months into a four-year presidency, with seemingly more cuts to come. In late May, the federal government canceled a contract to develop a new vaccine to protect against flu strains with pandemic potential (including the H5N1 bird flu), alarming state public health officials across the nation.
Some decisions by the feds have been successfully challenged in the courts. Realistically though, there is only so much the judges can and will do to force federal agencies to spend, especially when Congress endorses spending cuts. Meanwhile, states have duties and obligations to their residents. But making up for the massive federal shortfall is no easy feat. No state, acting alone, could come close to replicating the goods and services that the feds are no longer supplying. Each lacks economies of scale; the cost per person is prohibitively high without the bargaining power and efficiency of the federal government.
The answer, quite simply, is for the states to pool their resources, thereby spreading the costs over a far wider number of taxpayers.
Here are some examples of what clusters of like-minded states could do: set up interstate academic programs that pool students and faculty cut off from federal funds into large regional research consortia; re-create public-health and meteorology forecasting centers servicing member states; and finance pandemic planning and countermeasures, precisely what was lacking — and sorely needed — early in the COVID-19 crisis.
Though some may assume these arrangements require congressional authorization, the courts have said otherwise, insisting such approval is necessary only when states threaten federal supremacy. (The converse would be true here. The states would be teaming up only because the feds have absented themselves.)
Additional arrangements can be even looser understandings. Consider the vacuum created now that the Justice Department has disbanded the team that focused on corruption among officials and fraud by government employees. States can mobilize interstate criminal task forces to track and prosecute corruption by politicians, lobbyists and government contractors (who invariably, when violating federal laws, run afoul of myriad state laws, too).
The Trump administration is also tabling consumer protection and environmental investigations and prosecutions. Here too states can pool their resources, extend their jurisdictional reach and protect their citizens, while possibly recouping some expenses. Successful litigation often carries with it awards of legal fees and sometimes damages or monetary bounties: Lawsuits brought by states could force polluters to pay for the damage they do.
Of course, not all states will jump into action, at least not at first. But this is a feature, not a bug, of the coming clustering of like-minded states. The Trump administration has created an opportunity for beneficial 'races to the top' in regulatory matters.
Here's how that works: As Washington abdicates its long-relied-upon responsibilities, those states that commit to making up for the federal shortfalls will retain residents and businesses. They'll also attract new ones, particularly those frustrated that their home states aren't taking similar compensatory measures.
High-tax states are often at a competitive disadvantage, as evidenced by what the Wall Street Journal has repeatedly referred to as a 'Blue state exodus.' But we think that's less likely to happen going forward. Precisely because the feds are no longer promising to fund basic education, infrastructure and social services — and are no longer viewed as a reliable regulator — it's suddenly too risky to chance living or operating a business in a state that doesn't take basic health and safety seriously.
Interstate collaboration isn't a cure-all, but it's a start on rebuilding a new national compact without the political strings that have been attached to federal funding in recent months, one that may endure for the foreseeable future. It's a chance to demonstrate resourceful, resilient and good-faith public service at a time when the risk of being worn down into complacency is perilously high.
Aziz Z. Huq and Jon D. Michaels are professors of law at the University of Chicago and UCLA, respectively.
If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Atlanta dad's car now worth $30K — but he still owes $57K. Why Ramsey Show hosts say he's got to take a ‘bath'
Atlanta dad's car now worth $30K — but he still owes $57K. Why Ramsey Show hosts say he's got to take a ‘bath'

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Atlanta dad's car now worth $30K — but he still owes $57K. Why Ramsey Show hosts say he's got to take a ‘bath'

Terrence from Atlanta has a budget problem, and he knows it. The Georgia father recently called in to The Ramsey Show seeking advice on how to get rid of his car, a 2021 Kia Stinger GT2 that costs him $1,200 a month. He also pays $2,000 in child support every month — a financial burden that leaves him with little breathing room despite earning a six-figure salary. Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) 'I make $10,000 a month,' Terrence told co-hosts Ken Coleman and Dr. John Delony. 'I bring home $5,200 after taxes and child support.' Terrence bought the Stinger for about $60,000 — rolling in negative equity from a previous vehicle. Two years later and he still owes $57,000, but the car is now only worth about $30,000. 'Oh boy, that's a bath!' Coleman exclaimed. 'That is a bat right there.' Terrence's situation isn't rare. Unfortunately, many Americans find themselves 'car poor' — trapped by high monthly payments, inflated prices and interest rates that stretch already-thin budgets. According to CarEdge, the average price of a new car in the U.S. hovers around $48,699. Meanwhile, Experian reports the average monthly car payment for new vehicles sits at $742 as of Q4 2024. Interest rates on auto loans are also elevated, with new car buyers paying an average of 7.1% in Q1 2025, according to USA Today. All of this has led to Americans accumulating $1.64 trillion in auto loan debt as of Q1 2025, according to Trade Economics. Those numbers don't even factor in insurance, gas or maintenance costs. And with 20% of new car buyers now paying over $1,000 a month, Terrence is among a growing cohort of American drivers underwater on their loans. Read more: Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says — and that 'anyone' can do it Terrence's question for the co-hosts was simple: what's the fastest, least painful way out of this situation? In order to give the co-hosts a complete picture of his finances, Terrence said he typically has between $1,300 and $1,400 remaining every month after paying his child support and other expenses. The co-hosts offered Terrence two potential escape routes. One option is to aggressively pay off the car over a long period of time by throwing $3,000 a month at the debt. However, that route might include some extreme budgeting and maybe even a few overtime shifts for Terrence. "If you take that $1,200 a month [car] payment, you take that $1,300 extra and you go through your budget with a magnifying glass. You stop going out for a season, and let's say you can scrounge up $3,000 [per month] that includes this $1,200. You can pay this thing off,' Deloney said. The other route calls for Terrence to sell the car now for around $30,000 and buy a reliable used vehicle — like a high-mileage Toyota or a Buick, which Terrence once owned and loved — for about $7,500, and then pay off a big chunk of the auto loan balance with the roughly $22,000 remaining from the sale of the car. This would leave Terrence with roughly $35,000 left on the auto loan, which means he wouldn't be out of the woods just yet. Either way, Terrence is going to have to pull himself up by his boot straps and create a frugal budget in order to get out of this financial hole. Ultimately, the co-hosts applauded Terrence's honesty and determination to change course. 'I've got a daughter who's about to go to college, so I want to have the money," Terrence said. Coleman and Delony's final piece of advice? Ditch the debt, drive a modest car and stay focused on long-term goals. Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead How much cash do you plan to keep on hand after you retire? Here are 3 of the biggest reasons you'll need a substantial stash of savings in retirement Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Like what you read? Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise straight to your inbox every week. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

US imposes sanctions on a Palestinian NGO and other charities, accusing them ties to militant groups
US imposes sanctions on a Palestinian NGO and other charities, accusing them ties to militant groups

Boston Globe

time21 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

US imposes sanctions on a Palestinian NGO and other charities, accusing them ties to militant groups

The federal government claims that Addameer 'has long supported and is affiliated' with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a secular, left-wing movement with a political party and an armed wing that has carried out deadly attacks against Israelis. Israel and the United States have labeled the PFLP a terrorist organization. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Addameer did not immediately have a comment on the sanctions. Advertisement Israel has alleged that Addameer funds terrorism, a claim that the United Nations previously said it could not support with compelling evidence. In a 2022 The organization also works with Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and is a member of the World Organization Against Torture. Israel's 2022 storming of Addameer's offices, prompted a rebuke from the UN, who said in a statement that Israel had not provided convincing evidence to support the claim. The UN said Addameer was conducting 'critical human rights, humanitarian and development work in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.' Advertisement In February, Zachor Legal Institute, an Israeli-American advocacy group that says it focuses on combatting antisemitism and terrorism, requested Addameer be added to Treasury's sanctions list. Marc Greendorfer, president of Zachor Legal Institute said in an email to the Associated Press that his group is 'very pleased to see Treasury following up on our request.' He said the federal government should act 'to prevent hostile foreign actors from spreading hate and violence in the United States. We applaud Treasury's action and encourage Treasury to expand its focus to the other groups that we identified.' Other entities hit with sanctions Tuesday include: The Gaza-based charity Al Weam Charitable Society and its leader The Turkish charity Filistin Vakfi and its leader El Baraka Association for Charitable and Humanitarian Work and its leader The Netherlands-based Israa Charitable Foundation Netherlands and two employees The Italy-based Associazione Benefica La Cupola d'Oro A Because the majority of crowdfunding activity is legitimate, 'this status can make it more difficult for law enforcement attempting to investigate potential (terrorist financing) cases with a crowdfunding and online fundraising nexus,' the report said. Frankel reported from Jerusalem.

House to vote on repealing DC local laws on noncitizen voting, policing, immigration enforcement
House to vote on repealing DC local laws on noncitizen voting, policing, immigration enforcement

Yahoo

time24 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

House to vote on repealing DC local laws on noncitizen voting, policing, immigration enforcement

The Brief House Republicans are voting on three bills that would override D.C. laws on noncitizen voting rights, limiting police powers, and restricting immigration enforcement cooperation. One bill, HR 884, repeals D.C.'s 2022 law allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections. HR 2056 would dismantle D.C.'s sanctuary city protections by mandating cooperation with federal immigration authorities. WASHINGTON - The House of Representatives are voting Tuesday on three Republican-backed bills that would override several local D.C. laws. The bills would roll back D.C. efforts expand voting rights for non-citizens, restrict police and force the District to work with immigration enforcement efforts on a federal level. D.C. passed the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act in 2022, granting noncitizens in D.C. the right to vote in local elections. That includes mayoral races, D.C. Council positions, attorney general, ANC members, attorney general and D.C. ballot measures. Noncitizens can also run for elected office in the D.C. government. HR 884 would repeal the act, removing voting powers from noncitizens. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton released a statement, pushing back at Congress' power of local D.C. matters. "Last Congress, Republicans introduced 14 bills or amendments to prohibit noncitizens from voting in D.C. or to repeal, nullify or prohibit the carrying out of D.C.'s law that permits noncitizens to vote," said Norton. "Yet, Republicans refuse to make the only election law change D.C. residents have asked Congress to make, which is the right to hold elections for voting members of the House and Senate." The Protecting Our Nation's Capital Emergency Act, would dismantle parts of D.C.'s Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022. HR 2096 would allow D.C. police officers to negotiate disciplinary matters through collective bargaining. It would also restore a statute of limitation for claims against the Metropolitan Police Department. "This bill was introduced three days after House Republicans passed a continuing resolution that cut D.C.'s local budget by one billion dollars. That act of fiscal sabotage, which did not save the federal government any money, has led to a freeze on overtime, hiring and pay raises, and furloughs or layoffs may be next," said Norton. "Nine weeks ago today, the Senate passed the D.C. Local Funds Act to reverse the cut. The D.C. Local Funds Act is just sitting in the House. Like President Trump and the National Fraternal Order of Police, I call on the House to pass immediately the D.C. Local Funds Act." READ MORE: Congress' spending bill error leaves DC scrambling to cut $400M from budget HR 2056 would strike down D.C. policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. It would prohibit DC officials from "sending, receiving, maintaining, or exchanging with any Federal, State, or local government entity information regarding the citizenship or immigration status (lawful or unlawful) of any individual." The bill would effectively dismantle D.C.'s sanctuary city policies. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser made moves to quietly overturn a law that prevents local police from cooperating with ICE, including it in a provision of her 2026 budget proposal. Big picture view The D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 allows the city to elect its own mayor and council. It's also allowed for D.C. to choose Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners to handle community concerns. Congress still maintains control over D.C., including the ability to review all local legislation and appoint the city's judges. D.C. has no voting member in Congress, though it has a nonvoting Delegate. In February, legislators from Utah and Tennessee introduced a bill to strip D.C. of its ability to govern itself. The bill is named after D.C.'s Mayor Muriel Bowser – the "Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident (BOWSER) Act." The bill would eliminate D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 and would place D.C. under the full control of Congress. The Source This story includes information from the US House of Representatives, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, and previous FOX 5 DC reporting.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store