Federalism – is this the answer for America?

 

I was sent an an interesting Opinion piece in the Washingon Examiner yesterday by a Republican friend of mine.  It speaks to this simple truth — “that one of the enduring strengths of the American political system is its FEDERALISM — keeping accountability and power as close to the people as possible whenever possible.”

And the opinion piece goes on to speak of Gov. Mitch Daniels (Indiana) who took office in 2005 and inherited a $800 million deficit and in less than four years has turned that deficit into a $1.3 billion surplus for the state.  Daniels did a number of smart things — even sold a 75 year lease to their TOLL ROAD to a European company that has generated $3.85 billion in revenue for the state.  At the time, he was strongly criticized that the move was too risky. But no one is criticizing him now—especially when you see what’s going on in a state like California, which doesn’t appear to have a clue as to what they should do.

Federalism, at it’s core, looks “closer to home” for answers to our problems.   Would we be better off if our federal government adopted programs, ideas and policies (like what’s going on in Indiana) that have worked on a regional (State) basis and roll them out nationally? Should Federalism be a cornerstone of the GOP’s story to win back votes?

I was sent an an interesting Opinion piece in the Washingon Examiner Friday by a Republican friend of mine.  It speaks to this simple truth —

“that one of the enduring strengths of the American political system is its FEDERALISM — keeping accountability and power as close to the people as possible whenever possible.”

The opinion piece goes on to speak of Gov. Mitch Daniels (Indiana) who took office in 2005 and inherited a $800 million deficit and in less than four years has turned that deficit into a $1.3 billion surplus for the state.  Daniels did a number of smart things — even sold a 75 year lease to their TOLL ROAD to a European company that has generated $3.85 billion in revenue for the state.  At the time, he was strongly criticized that the move was too risky. But no one is criticizing him now—especially when you see what’s going on in a state like California, which doesn’t appear to have a clue as to what they should do.

Federalism, at it’s core, looks “closer to home” for answers to our problems.   Would we be better off if our federal government adopted programs, ideas and policies (like what’s going on in Indiana) that have worked on a regional (State) basis and roll them out nationally? Should Federalism be a cornerstone of the GOP’s story to win back votes?

I posed this same question at http://www.callmegop.com — Republicans and Democrats alike — responded.  I’d like to think you might find this of interest.