The article I read was discussing how increased spending on health care is severely limiting the amount of money the states are getting. With more and more money being spent on health care, there is less money to give to the states, for things like education, and transportation. It’s almost impossible to tackle any of these large national priorities without considering how reforms would be put in place in states. State and local health expenditures have more than tripled since 1980, which means that state governments have to spend more money on health care, and less on other things. States have to make cutbacks, which will just hurt the economy even more. The relationship between the states and the federal governments needs to improve in order to start repairing the budget.
This article relates to federalism because it is focusing on how the federal government controls what the state governments spend their money on, and how much they get. A specific quote from the article that emphasizes federalism is, “While states could use more flexible federal funding to respond to local circumstances, states’ resistance to federal mandates is sometimes disingenuous,” This shows that the state governments are not exactly cooperating with the national government on the budget.
This is important because without money from the national government, then the state governments cannot do anything, and if the state governments have no money to spend, then a lot of people are going to suffer because of this. And if the state government doesn’t cooperate with the national government, then the national government will not give the states any money. The national government pretty much controls what they state government’s do, so the state government must work together with the national government in order for things to get done.
In a Crisis, Rethinking Fiscal Federalism
No comments:
Post a Comment