We can learn a lot from experiments that FAIL. Not all experiments succeed and not every experiment should be scaled to the national level. Kansas, for example, has provided a tax cutting experiment that has failed and from that failed experiment a lot can be learned.
24
There's one state's experiments that I wish more states would adopt: California's switch to drawing voting districts with a computer. Neither party is allowed to gerrymander. They've also gone to a state primary where the top two candidates, no matter their party affiliation, run in the final election. Yes, I like it partly because it resulted in a Democratic majority, but even if Republicans took over, I'd still feel as if it were a more representative result.
14
Laboratories?
Do liberals understand that the states created the federal government and not the other way around?
Do liberals understand that the states created the federal government and not the other way around?
4
One step away from partisanship would be to abolish party primaries in favor of a general primary. The top two or three vote getters would move on to the general election regardless of party. This reduced the influence of the extremes and emphasizes mainstream appeal which reduces the decible level and foaming at the mouth. We should all ask our state legislators to adopt this change to the election code.
3
Why would political polarization at the state level make them less of laboratories? I would expect that states controlled by a single party--left or right--are much more likely to try new and creative solutions than states with gridlocked-splits. Almost all of the innovations named--vouchers, energy efficiency, etc.--started out as an extreme from one party that was opposed by the other. Why does innovation have to be bipartisan? The states work best as laboratories when they push the boundaries that the federal government is unable to. I don't think that fine tuning bipartisan agendas--what this article seems to be concerned about--was what Brandeis was referring to.
1
Apparently Professor Chatterji is disregarding, or unfamiliar with, the myriad of new ideas and innovations in California under Jerry Brown's second tenure as governor.... new ideas and fresh thinking that have pulled California, the world's 8th largest economy, out of economic doldrums and into robust prosperity.
2
I reject the notion that there is anything useful about States as “laboratories of democracy” (or anything else, for that matter). The idea is that because certain programs later adopted at the federal level were first implemented in a State, States have performed usefully as laboratories. However, to accept this, one would have to accept (1) that the programs could not have been developed at the federal level, and (2) the programs were useful (several of the ones mentioned as examples in the article seemed pretty useless to me). There are many ways that a larger institution can try out ideas in only a portion of its domain: this is done all the time in corporations and at the state and even local levels.
And even if no useful programs could be implemented at the federal level unless they originated at the state level, I would still argue that the immense cost we pay every day in America because of the redundancies, inconsistencies, and duplication of effort caused by our conception of States would utterly overwhelm any possibly benefit we may receive from having them—especially imaginary benefits such as those stemming from States as “laboratories of democracy”.
And even if no useful programs could be implemented at the federal level unless they originated at the state level, I would still argue that the immense cost we pay every day in America because of the redundancies, inconsistencies, and duplication of effort caused by our conception of States would utterly overwhelm any possibly benefit we may receive from having them—especially imaginary benefits such as those stemming from States as “laboratories of democracy”.
It is unfair to keep referring to the political divide between Republicans and Democrats as "partisanship" as this implies both parties are responsible for this problem. The divide is more accurately described as Republican intransigence. Despite the Democratic party becoming more conservative over the last 20 years, the Republicans are still unwilling to work with Democrats.
4
Ironically - the author either does not know or chooses to ignore - this is the way the country was designed to run. Read the constitution.
Passing federal laws is supposed to be hard - Passing state laws is supposed to be easy.
Don't like what your state is doing - move - and as a side note interesting how the inter-state flows of workers have panned out over that past decade (losers include NY and Ohio).
Gridlock in Washington - get over it - it was written to our birth certificate.
Passing federal laws is supposed to be hard - Passing state laws is supposed to be easy.
Don't like what your state is doing - move - and as a side note interesting how the inter-state flows of workers have panned out over that past decade (losers include NY and Ohio).
Gridlock in Washington - get over it - it was written to our birth certificate.
1
California has been and continues to be a leader in establishing new policies and programs. Because of its large population, new programs established here can be scaled up to a national level. Many easterners may think of us as fruits and nuts, but the reality is that we've long been a leader. The same is true for the other west coast states, Washington and Oregon.
5
One minor point: As usual, the NYT characterizes the divide over Common Core as between anti-Obama conservatives on the right and teachers on the left. This simple-minded dualism fails to account for educators, a small number, who have actually read the Common Core standards, a smaller number still, and find them educationally incomplete and incoherent. They should be rejected on educational, not political or professional, grounds.
1
We here in the states will continue doing what we can to ensure we live, at least on the local level, in the kind of democracy we want to. For instance, WA passed a referendum to close the gun show and online gun sale loophole that is already working to keep guns from criminals and crazies. We legalized gay marriage, recreational marijuana use, and raised the minimum wage in Seattle. Now the governor wants to tackle income disparity and school funding by imposing a capital gains tax on the wealthy. We're certainly not going to wait for DC to do any of this, because they never will.
5
Innovation in early childhood education from North Carolina??? Adopt the tax policy employed by Gov. Brownback of Kansas???
This article makes one thing clear - there really are no good ideas coming out of the Republican controlled states. Generally, the Republican controlled states are almost all doing much worse than the Democratic controlled states - with few exceptions. That's not an accident.
Republican controlled North Carolina has compulsory education for children between the ages of seven and twelve. Yes, that "freedom loving, state's rights" bastion is quite happy to have illiterate children toiling away in the tobacco fields. A very innovative model for the rest of the nation.
Kansas is imploding thanks to absolutely ruinous tax cuts that Mr. Brownback has inflicted upon his citizenry in spite of overwhelming empirical evidence amassed over the last 30 years that massive tax cuts do not increase tax revenue. But in some circles, ideology always trumps reality.
I think it's time to update Justice Brandeis' statement. SOME states are laboratories of democracy. Unfortunately for the residents, most of the Republican controlled states have become laboratories for suppression of democracy. The Republican governors and legislators are spending every waking moment attempting remain in power - not by the force of their ideals but by crushing democracy through gerrymandering and voter suppression.
This article makes one thing clear - there really are no good ideas coming out of the Republican controlled states. Generally, the Republican controlled states are almost all doing much worse than the Democratic controlled states - with few exceptions. That's not an accident.
Republican controlled North Carolina has compulsory education for children between the ages of seven and twelve. Yes, that "freedom loving, state's rights" bastion is quite happy to have illiterate children toiling away in the tobacco fields. A very innovative model for the rest of the nation.
Kansas is imploding thanks to absolutely ruinous tax cuts that Mr. Brownback has inflicted upon his citizenry in spite of overwhelming empirical evidence amassed over the last 30 years that massive tax cuts do not increase tax revenue. But in some circles, ideology always trumps reality.
I think it's time to update Justice Brandeis' statement. SOME states are laboratories of democracy. Unfortunately for the residents, most of the Republican controlled states have become laboratories for suppression of democracy. The Republican governors and legislators are spending every waking moment attempting remain in power - not by the force of their ideals but by crushing democracy through gerrymandering and voter suppression.
22
Let's see how Illinois is going to resolve their $100 BILLION public employee unfunded pension liability without driving every private sector taxpayer out of the state or broke.
That will be an interesting lab experiment to watch.
That will be an interesting lab experiment to watch.
1
"Governors like Bill Clinton and George W. Bush leveraged their state policy successes as springboards to the Oval Office."
I'll leave it to others to comment on how Bill Clinton used his long tenure in Arkansas to infiltrate the Democratic Party hierarchy.
But George W. Bush as a policy success in Texas?
There was manufactured hype about Bush having done something for education in Texas. But that was more truthiness than truth.
More importantly, it had nothing to do with why Bush got tapped by a well-heeled wing of the Republican Party, the oil patch boys and the camp followers from 41's presidency. W was picked as the perfect Manchurian Candidate by the same backroom Texas contingent which had puppetted him up to be Governor.
Unfortunately Osama Bin Laden had other plans on how to occupy W's time at 1600 Pennsylvania. W took the bait and in the process he was ventriloquized by Dick Cheney and his energy mob, and the Cut! Cut! Cut! taxes on the rich crowd.
Bush eventually got enough teen-aged pique when he found out he wasn't really even the Decider and was able to shuck off his various Svengalis. But he did little else in the process other than dig the country into a deeper hole.
One exception.
In the financial crisis, he was scared enough to take Hank Paulson's and Ben Bernanke's advice to let them make a first attempt at cleaning up the mess they had enabled.
But W a policy success? Hahahahahaha.
Oh, by the way, W's "springboard" was the Five Amigos on SCOTUS.
I'll leave it to others to comment on how Bill Clinton used his long tenure in Arkansas to infiltrate the Democratic Party hierarchy.
But George W. Bush as a policy success in Texas?
There was manufactured hype about Bush having done something for education in Texas. But that was more truthiness than truth.
More importantly, it had nothing to do with why Bush got tapped by a well-heeled wing of the Republican Party, the oil patch boys and the camp followers from 41's presidency. W was picked as the perfect Manchurian Candidate by the same backroom Texas contingent which had puppetted him up to be Governor.
Unfortunately Osama Bin Laden had other plans on how to occupy W's time at 1600 Pennsylvania. W took the bait and in the process he was ventriloquized by Dick Cheney and his energy mob, and the Cut! Cut! Cut! taxes on the rich crowd.
Bush eventually got enough teen-aged pique when he found out he wasn't really even the Decider and was able to shuck off his various Svengalis. But he did little else in the process other than dig the country into a deeper hole.
One exception.
In the financial crisis, he was scared enough to take Hank Paulson's and Ben Bernanke's advice to let them make a first attempt at cleaning up the mess they had enabled.
But W a policy success? Hahahahahaha.
Oh, by the way, W's "springboard" was the Five Amigos on SCOTUS.
4
And just why would a Democratic governor want to do what Brownback did in Kansas, that is bankrupt his state?
3
At least one laboratory of democracy – Colorado – is doing a weed experiment.
And why, exactly, would another state want to adopt the failed Kansas tax reform policy?
3
Maybe I did not read this correctly - but what is exactly the point of this Op-ed? Mr. Chatterji says "Don't look to States for New Ideas" and offers a few examples of how states are trying new things but most of those are not universally popular or applicable. What is new about that? Haven't states always come up with individual ideas that did not make sense for the national context, and arguably are not sensible even for that state? (Kansas' current tax policy being a good example.)
"The 50 laboratories of democracy will produce many so-called cures, but none of them will go down very well in our nation’s capital."
Great. So we should all just give up and die? What is exactly your point sir?
"The 50 laboratories of democracy will produce many so-called cures, but none of them will go down very well in our nation’s capital."
Great. So we should all just give up and die? What is exactly your point sir?
1
funny thing is: "Die Welt", a german newspaper, postet an article today, which states, that the US, concerning futuristic ideas, is just always ahead of us Europeans...
http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article136219117/Warum-die-USA-uns...
http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article136219117/Warum-die-USA-uns...
Did the illustrator, Wes Bedrosian, intentionally make the billowing map of the United States evocative of a turkey?
1
Please do not include all states in this generalization. Many states are, indeed, trying new proposals, from legalizing marijuana and then struggling with the bureaucratic minutiae that follows to free 2-year junior college education, way ahead of the President's recent proposal. Those are just two off the top of my head. Our Governor is currently looking for a way to tax high energy users to fund more energy saving transportation alternatives. I find, here in WA, that politics is becoming increasingly local, thank goodness, partly because of the other WA's gridlock. A significant silver lining, IMO.
8
Absent from this article are the strongest arguments for federal action - certain issues like gun control and environmental issues cannot adequately be addressed within the confines of a single state. Others, like regulations and requirements imposed on health care insurers, such as community rating, would be meaningless if people can simply opt out by buying insurance from a different state. A varied regulatory environment also makes it more expensive for companies to operate, and are harder to impose unilaterally by smaller states that don't have a large market share. States often boast of making efforts at luring businesses away from other states, encouraging a race to the bottom effect. And, perhaps, most obviously, because some states are much wealthier than others, social programs designed to help those in need cannot nearly as effective without some from of federal funding. Within states, it's clear that the quality of community funded public schools varies enormously depending on the resources of the community, and the same holds true of state vs. federal funding.
The fact is, that much of the push for state inspired solutions comes from people who don't believe in paying taxes to support others and who fundamentally oppose the transfer of wealth. And the fact that so many people are seemingly on board with this idea is beyond depressing.
The fact is, that much of the push for state inspired solutions comes from people who don't believe in paying taxes to support others and who fundamentally oppose the transfer of wealth. And the fact that so many people are seemingly on board with this idea is beyond depressing.
21
Does anyone doubt that we need serious campaign finance reform on a national and state level as well as adopting a non partisan board for redistricting.
61
I do not doubt that fact. But it will not happen because such reform has to originate with those who would be most affected by it. Never happen!
This is the key to everything political in this country - voting rights, ending corruption, bipartisanship, constituents choosing their representatives instead of the other way around, ending the power of lobbyists to write legislation. Democracy itself. The media have fallen down on the job in not emphasizing this basic necessity - but then of course they've been thoroughly corporatized and want to write legislation just as much as any other rich and powerful special interest.
Campaign finance reform should be the Number One topic of debate and legislation across the country if we are to have a chance at retrieving our democracy from corporations and the One Percent.
Campaign finance reform should be the Number One topic of debate and legislation across the country if we are to have a chance at retrieving our democracy from corporations and the One Percent.
3
I think the only solution to the redistricting problem is to make all House seats at-large seats. Bingo! gerrymandering can't be done and we get competitive races that allow for the possibility of a third party. As far as campaign finance reform goes the only solution is public financing accompanied by free access to the airwaves to all FEC certified candidates. Anything else is just window dressing for the circus we have now.
1
Three plus decades ago, a number of states had the near perfect method of taxing the income of multinational corporations operating in their states: worldwide combined reporting (aka unitary taxation). Tested in court three times and approved in court three times by increasing majorities: Container Corp. in 1983 by a vote of 5-3 (Justice Stevens did not participate) and Barclays Bank and Colgate-Palmolive in 1994 by votes of 7-2 and 9-0, respectively (Justice Stevens did participate). However, British Prime Minster Thatcher hated this method for good reason - it threaten the status of her many tax havens and The City - London's Financial Center. So she pressured President Reagan who in turn pressured those states using worldwide combined reporting to back-off and adopt a restricted version: water's edge combined reporting (better called watered-down or skim milk combined reporting) which excludes the income of foreign subsidiaries ("overseas business organizations") from a state's tax base. Your can read about it at www.margaretthatcher.org and a search there for unitary taxation). The biggest beneficiaries of the water's edge method: foreign based multinational with US subsidiaries - because the US profits that they shift offshore are NOT repatriated. "We point out that the water's edge method was adopted for the benefit of foreign businesses." NH Supreme Court in their Caterpillar decision. A state license that favors foreign corporations competing against US corps!
16
Whether what happens in states scale or not they still are laboratories. The Brownback experiment in Kansas is a total failure, i.e. cutting taxes, especially on the wealthy and businesses does not lead to prosperity. So we know not to repeat that experiment elsewhere. Mississippi has shown the rest of the nation that pathetically low spending on public schools yields the worst education system in the country. And now Scott Walker in Wisconsin wants to tax those people with fuel efficient vehicles because they don't use as much gasoline. Because those who try and spare the enviroment must be liberals and no good deed should go unpunished. And don't forget the successful Romney Care in Massachusetts which actaully appears to be scalable given the continuing decrease in the uninsured nationally.
21
I do not think the states will cease to be laboratories for democracy - that seems to be barely supported by the rather limited analysis presented here. There will always be policies that are tested in states and then adopted nationally - like Mitt Romney's Obamacare (or President Obama's Romneycare) and there will be policies that will fail - like the disastrous approach of Kansas Governor Sam Brownback.
The critical problem we have right now is entirely different from what this article suggests - and that is the damaging influence of corporate lobbying in policy. Yes lobbying is important and can serve a positive purpose. But there is sufficient evidence that it is not working that way today. Just read the tax code if you have doubts about how deeply manipulative is lobbying in the writing of our laws. And such interference in policy-making is directly responsible for Congress gridlock since everyone in Congress wants to secure their seat in the next election by securing support for their campaigns.
If you want one major step in solving the kind of gridlock that is paralyzing Congress, it is simple - campaign finance reform. Blaming states for being partisan is a red herring... states have always been partisan and that has never damaged their ability to innovate.
The critical problem we have right now is entirely different from what this article suggests - and that is the damaging influence of corporate lobbying in policy. Yes lobbying is important and can serve a positive purpose. But there is sufficient evidence that it is not working that way today. Just read the tax code if you have doubts about how deeply manipulative is lobbying in the writing of our laws. And such interference in policy-making is directly responsible for Congress gridlock since everyone in Congress wants to secure their seat in the next election by securing support for their campaigns.
If you want one major step in solving the kind of gridlock that is paralyzing Congress, it is simple - campaign finance reform. Blaming states for being partisan is a red herring... states have always been partisan and that has never damaged their ability to innovate.
14
Seems to me that the Sovereign States and the selection of those to govern us at the federal level has, throughout our history, been both political and partisan.
What I suspect that the author is complaining about is that many of the Sovereign States have seen people elected that are not of the liberal...er...progressive persuasion.
But isn't it the point of elections to determine which partisan credo is the one that The People wish to have leading them?
What I suspect that the author is complaining about is that many of the Sovereign States have seen people elected that are not of the liberal...er...progressive persuasion.
But isn't it the point of elections to determine which partisan credo is the one that The People wish to have leading them?
The Federal government has so alienated States with over reaching authority that States only look inward. Obamacare, the EPA, Immigration, etc., has all caused the States to turn away from anything resembling laboratories, and rather for Governors to seek actual answers to real problems instead of the typical Liberal ideal of social engineering.
3
The EPA has been around a long time, and has done a lot of good. I'm sure that you like breathing clean air. I sure do. And I prefer that waterways support life, much of it in the human food chain. As for immigration, what do you propose? We are a country, so immigration should be federally determined. If each state had its own border patrol and customs, then maybe you could take immigration away from the Feds. This is not what has hampered innovation. What has hampered innovation is oil soaked billionaires buying politicians to get their own way on everything, when innovation would mean more quickly developed alternate and sustainable fuels. It's Republicans who reject any, and I mean ANY proposal that comes from this president, just because he made it.
1
Thank you, Feds, for reducing States to banana republics by making them dependent on your handouts. Federal mandates, backed up by the threat of removal of Federal funds, are the biggest drag on State govt. today. If you want the States to get back to innovating, get the Feds off their backs!
3
Fine, but this works both ways. If you don't want the Federal mandates, then you're not entitled to the funds.
3
California is the 8th largest economy in the world. People are allowed to vote. We don't have a Supreme Court that does not allow the ballots to be counted.
Districts are determined by a non-partisan commission, so we do not have gerrymandered districts that ensure the re-election of right wing Republicans.
The State has a diverse population, including 38% Hispanic, 40% white and 14% Asian people.
The California Citizens Redistricting Commission determines Congressional district boundaries on a non-partisan basis to assure equal rights in voting. It is illegal to have gerrymandered districts that ensure the re-election of incumbent candidates. The voters enacted the redistricting law by ballot initiative. Of course it is a denial of equal protection of the law under the federal constitution, but California does not depend on federal laws that are not enforced by the federal government.
Democrats control both houses of the legislature and the Governor's office.
Districts are determined by a non-partisan commission, so we do not have gerrymandered districts that ensure the re-election of right wing Republicans.
The State has a diverse population, including 38% Hispanic, 40% white and 14% Asian people.
The California Citizens Redistricting Commission determines Congressional district boundaries on a non-partisan basis to assure equal rights in voting. It is illegal to have gerrymandered districts that ensure the re-election of incumbent candidates. The voters enacted the redistricting law by ballot initiative. Of course it is a denial of equal protection of the law under the federal constitution, but California does not depend on federal laws that are not enforced by the federal government.
Democrats control both houses of the legislature and the Governor's office.
27
Should note that the redistricting initiative was a fairly recent development, a needed response to previous gridlock. I don't think the full effects will be felt until after the next census. But, California has also reformed the primary process so that, now, the two top vote getters in the primary will face each other in the general election. The purpose was to encourage centrist dialogue and discourage "base"driven politics. As California goes, so goes the nation - eventually?
1
California also has a mid-sized nation's worth of unfunded liabilities in their pension and retiree health care systems that will shortly begin to sap every dollar of initiative out of the Californian economy...
...All thanks to the re-election of perhaps one of the most liberal...er...progressive of politicians ever to take office.
Not sure that's all that much t o crow about.
...All thanks to the re-election of perhaps one of the most liberal...er...progressive of politicians ever to take office.
Not sure that's all that much t o crow about.
1
hmmm, .. consider Jerry Brown, now on his 4th term as the governor of California. The turn around in that state has been dramatic and he is promoting some innovative ideas wrt clean energy and mass transit. Not quite sure how this was overlooked.
23
hmmm, .. consider Jerry Brown, now on his 4th term as the governor of California. The turn around in that state has been dramatic and he is promoting some innovative ideas wrt clean energy and mass transit. Not quite sure how this was overlooked.
===================
I keep hearing people talking about the "dramatic turn around" in California and have yet to see it backed up by any facts. California is ranked 20th in GDP growth (2%) and is ranked 48th in unemployment rate (7.1%).
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/gsp_newsrelease.htm
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
California has some of the worst schools in the nation
http://edsource.org/2013/california-students-among-worst-performers-on-n...
Only Illinois has a worse credit rating
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2014/0...
This is a dramatic turnaround?
===================
I keep hearing people talking about the "dramatic turn around" in California and have yet to see it backed up by any facts. California is ranked 20th in GDP growth (2%) and is ranked 48th in unemployment rate (7.1%).
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/gsp_newsrelease.htm
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
California has some of the worst schools in the nation
http://edsource.org/2013/california-students-among-worst-performers-on-n...
Only Illinois has a worse credit rating
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2014/0...
This is a dramatic turnaround?
Yes, written like the good lapdog statist that you are....
You have a flawed premise in your thesis. That being the insistence of state innovations initiating adoption on the federal level. There is absolutely no reason for federal adoption of state standards. States can decide for themselves what they want to do or want to discard independently of what other states are doing.
But that does not explain why states have become stagnant is their development and adoption of innovative solutions. The force behind that involves the federal government itself.
Federal mandates have so constrained the parameters of what states can do that there is limited ability for states to innovate.
We have a Constitution for a reason. Let's get back to the constraints imposed on the federal government by the states rather than being managed the other way around. Let the Ninth and Tenth Amendments be as important as the First.
You have a flawed premise in your thesis. That being the insistence of state innovations initiating adoption on the federal level. There is absolutely no reason for federal adoption of state standards. States can decide for themselves what they want to do or want to discard independently of what other states are doing.
But that does not explain why states have become stagnant is their development and adoption of innovative solutions. The force behind that involves the federal government itself.
Federal mandates have so constrained the parameters of what states can do that there is limited ability for states to innovate.
We have a Constitution for a reason. Let's get back to the constraints imposed on the federal government by the states rather than being managed the other way around. Let the Ninth and Tenth Amendments be as important as the First.
6
No, no, you don't understand the issue. When I was a state worker here in Wisconsin, Republican Governor Tommy Thompson had us claim federal waivers to test new provisions to reform Welfare (AFDC) and Medicaid. The feds allowed us to test new programs and the results eventually led to federal changes. A few other states were doing experiments too.
In the last few years, even efforts by Obama to allow states to experiment on environmental and health care projects have been willfully misinterpreted by Fox News, right wing pundits and the tea party as attempts to take away freedoms, rather than expand the states' role in creating national policy.
The climate of fear and paranoia created by Republicans that has deadlocked Congress for the last four years has also halted innovation at the state level, except in places like California, where an all Democratic leadership has allowed long standing problems to be addressed and solved.
In the last few years, even efforts by Obama to allow states to experiment on environmental and health care projects have been willfully misinterpreted by Fox News, right wing pundits and the tea party as attempts to take away freedoms, rather than expand the states' role in creating national policy.
The climate of fear and paranoia created by Republicans that has deadlocked Congress for the last four years has also halted innovation at the state level, except in places like California, where an all Democratic leadership has allowed long standing problems to be addressed and solved.
6
This sounds like the old "states rights" argument made by the Confederacy. I guess you folks don't really want one country but rather a loose association of individual entities called states. Perhaps you should all secede and let the rest of us build something called a country where the overriding idea is that we are all in this together and work for the common good.
5
The author defeats his own argument. The fed imposes layers of one size fits all requirements and bureaucracy and wonders what is proclaimed to be a success in one state is a failure in another. Usually the successful state is the same red/blue color of the party in power and the failure is the opposite.
The states should not just be labs of innovation, they should be competitors within a fair and stable set of operating rules. Unfortunately the self justifying ego of Washington is simply too big and too insecure to let someone else be a success without Washington getting the credit.
The states should not just be labs of innovation, they should be competitors within a fair and stable set of operating rules. Unfortunately the self justifying ego of Washington is simply too big and too insecure to let someone else be a success without Washington getting the credit.
Didn't we already fight the states' rights battle? And isn't the side that lost 150 years ago the same one that is now trying to dismantle the federal government in the name of....I dunno....states' rights? Aren't the obstructionists in Washington essentially the states' rights advocates? These are not "laboratories for democracy" but simply schoolyard bullies whining, "If you don't do it my way, I'm going to take your ball and go home."
And hopefully, no Democrat will adopt Gov. Brownback's radical tax reform, as the article suggests. If that's a lab, it's for some sadistic scientist trying to find out how much misery you can inflict on the middle class before they cry "Uncle." Evidently, a lot.
And hopefully, no Democrat will adopt Gov. Brownback's radical tax reform, as the article suggests. If that's a lab, it's for some sadistic scientist trying to find out how much misery you can inflict on the middle class before they cry "Uncle." Evidently, a lot.
12
The tenth amendment has not been repealed. The only "states rights" question settled by the Civil War was that secession is prohibited.
May I ask what role the Sovereign States and the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution mean given your assumptions?
Are they just meaningless phrases in our founding documents, to be ignored at will and trotted forward only when convenient?
Please be specific and detailed in your reply.
Are they just meaningless phrases in our founding documents, to be ignored at will and trotted forward only when convenient?
Please be specific and detailed in your reply.
As the last election showed, most of the states [legislatures and governors] would like to reduce government interference in how they embezzle money, take kickbacks and pontificate. And that is, apparently what the voters want as well.
9
Perhaps if Mr. Chatterji left the twin ivory towers of Duke and Harvard and looked west he would find that California he would see our history of bold, new ideas. Cannabis legalization started here - as will our new bullet train. There is much to celebrate on the left side of the Hudson.
8
A key part of the failure of states to innovate is that along with the growth in partisanship and single-party control of state governments, most of that growth has been rightward. Republicans control about twice as many states as Democrats. Two Republican states that have tried to "innovate" are Kansas and North Carolina, promoting an extreme, conservative Republican agenda which have failed disastrously.
On the other side, California, controlled by Democrats, has flourished.
The problem is the failure of the Republican right-wing conservative evangelical Grover Northquist ALEC-controlled NRA sponsored Tea Party agenda. But their supporters don't get it (hence the 2014 elections).
Most of the problems in today's America can be laid directly at the feet of the Republican takeover of, now, 3/4s of our federal government (House, Senate, Supreme Court), and their control of state governments.
Should America ever wake up to this fact, see what's really happening, and start voting sensibly, maybe things could change. It's not accident that the economy has grown strongly during Democratic presidential administrations, and during the Democratic dominance of the 1930s through the 1960s.
On the other side, California, controlled by Democrats, has flourished.
The problem is the failure of the Republican right-wing conservative evangelical Grover Northquist ALEC-controlled NRA sponsored Tea Party agenda. But their supporters don't get it (hence the 2014 elections).
Most of the problems in today's America can be laid directly at the feet of the Republican takeover of, now, 3/4s of our federal government (House, Senate, Supreme Court), and their control of state governments.
Should America ever wake up to this fact, see what's really happening, and start voting sensibly, maybe things could change. It's not accident that the economy has grown strongly during Democratic presidential administrations, and during the Democratic dominance of the 1930s through the 1960s.
23
Ever wonder why the "nonpartisan Nebraska unicameral legislature" has not been adopted by at least one other state or territory? Perhaps it's because Nebraska only pretends it to be nonpartisan. Virtually all laboratory investigations and experiments are failures and advances occur because of failure analysis. Maybe Nebraska could attempt to really set aside the destructive forces of partisanship and model a solution for the United States Congress. George Washington was so correct when he said in his farewell address that partisanship is the country's "worst enemy". With apologizes to "Where Have All The Flowers Gone": Oh, when will we ever learn? Oh, when will we ever learn?
3
CA is bouncing back from the doldrums because we finally have thrown the GOP bums out. For years they held the democratic majority hostage by having just enough power to goof things up. Now that the GOP is marginalized, we are doing much better. Some of the failing states ought to try it!
27
CA is bouncing back from the doldrums because we finally have thrown the GOP bums out. For years they held the democratic majority hostage by having just enough power to goof things up.
=================
California ranks 20th in GDP growth (2%) and 48th in unemployment rate (7.1%). The GDP growth rate is actually down from 2.7% the previous year.
You have one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation and an economic growth rate that shrank by 25% and you call that "bouncing back?"
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/gsp_newsrelease.htm
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
=================
California ranks 20th in GDP growth (2%) and 48th in unemployment rate (7.1%). The GDP growth rate is actually down from 2.7% the previous year.
You have one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation and an economic growth rate that shrank by 25% and you call that "bouncing back?"
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/gsp_newsrelease.htm
http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
In our state, Sam Brownback is running for president (someday) on the backs of the poor, elderly, disabled and young in the State of Kansas. Increasingly his idiotic tax cuts for the Koch boys is harming every area of the state.
Our courts are facing having to shut down for days because the governor wants money cut until they go along with his "great idea." Public services are nothing. People are moving out of the state and new people will not move into a state full of religious zealots and bad schools.
In the meantime, he is further impoverishing those who are too old and/or poor to leave. The hordes of cash are not trickling down to the counties who are raising property taxes on the one thing most elderly have of value-their homes. They even want to raise the sales tax on food for the people who can barely make it anyway.
We in Kansas are a cruel example of what a state should NOT do as a laboratory for the federal government.
Our courts are facing having to shut down for days because the governor wants money cut until they go along with his "great idea." Public services are nothing. People are moving out of the state and new people will not move into a state full of religious zealots and bad schools.
In the meantime, he is further impoverishing those who are too old and/or poor to leave. The hordes of cash are not trickling down to the counties who are raising property taxes on the one thing most elderly have of value-their homes. They even want to raise the sales tax on food for the people who can barely make it anyway.
We in Kansas are a cruel example of what a state should NOT do as a laboratory for the federal government.
31
Sam Brownback is a smart, but awful, politician. He is the epitome of what's wrong with Kansas and America.
Read this Op-Ed he wrote about Evolution from a presidential 2007 debate:
"http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/opinion/31brownback.html"
He is so sure of the "truths" of God and religion, yet he is a) absolutely 100% wrong, b) there is zero evidence for any of his so-called "truths" and c) he would have us believe he's a reasonable guy.
Yet Kansans voted him in as governor. Those ignorant voters are getting what they wanted, and screwing the rest of the state as a result.
Read this Op-Ed he wrote about Evolution from a presidential 2007 debate:
"http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/opinion/31brownback.html"
He is so sure of the "truths" of God and religion, yet he is a) absolutely 100% wrong, b) there is zero evidence for any of his so-called "truths" and c) he would have us believe he's a reasonable guy.
Yet Kansans voted him in as governor. Those ignorant voters are getting what they wanted, and screwing the rest of the state as a result.
2
I take it that you didn't vote for Brownback, even though the majority of Kansans did?
What part of the process of elections are you having problems understanding?
What part of the process of elections are you having problems understanding?
1
I find it interesting the author says our Tenn. republican governors initiative to make the first two years of community college free probably won't work elsewhere. Isn't it odd that he swipes it away with the back of his hand even though we are doing this in a no income tax state. I'm sure glad I did not get my MBA at Harvard. We've been watching for six years what that school has produced.
6
You are referring to A Mr. Ted Cruz perchance? Or to George Walker Bush maybe? Surely you are not referring to the guy who got our troops out of two neverending wars, finished off Bin Laden, enabled healthcare access to 10million Americans, reversed the job losses and brought the country back from the Great Recession, led as the stock market tripled in 6 years - you surely do not mean that guy, do you? Do you?
3
I am sure that the next republican president that attended Harvard will be considered to be very well educated by most republicans. Where you sit depends on where you stand, after all.
1
So without an income tax where does the money come from to pay for things like college, police, roads, firefighters etc? Subsidies from Blue states no doubt. But I guess you can point to all of these thins as proof that the Federal government can't do anything right.
2
Red states opted out of Medicaid to deny healthcare to their working poor. Why? Look at a map of those states which are mostly in the deep South. They didn't expand Medicaid because the working poor there are mostly black and Latino. States' rights these days is just fancy talk for the right to deny the vote, the right to deny public education, the right to pollute, and most especially, and most dear to Republican hearts, the right to keep the poor poor and kick the working class into the ditch. It's about dropping the last two words from the Pledge of Allegiance "with liberty and justice for all."
12
you list "no Democrat willing to adopt the radical tax reforms of Gov. Sam Brownback" as one of the reasons the states can't innovate policy. surely you must be joking. That no democrat is stupid enough to follow Kansas' leap into the abyss is hopeful, not a sign of worry.
I agree that the laboratory in the red states is broken, but in California we have tried / are trying all sorts of things:
Global warming policy (AB32)
Rainy Day Reserve fund for state finances
Prison reform
Infrastructure investment (just passed a huge water bond)
Medical Marijuana (lead the country)
So we're doing just fine out here, thank you.
I agree that the laboratory in the red states is broken, but in California we have tried / are trying all sorts of things:
Global warming policy (AB32)
Rainy Day Reserve fund for state finances
Prison reform
Infrastructure investment (just passed a huge water bond)
Medical Marijuana (lead the country)
So we're doing just fine out here, thank you.
15
The underlying problem is that the Republicans have no ideas beyond the same old aging proposals to cut taxes for corporations and the very rich. So, what's to innovate in the 60% of states controlled by Republicans>
There will be attempts to outlaw abortions and many female contraceptives entirely and to allow guns to be carried everywhere, but these are hardly new ideas and plenty of people in Washington are just as willing to impose them of the federal level.
There will be attempts to outlaw abortions and many female contraceptives entirely and to allow guns to be carried everywhere, but these are hardly new ideas and plenty of people in Washington are just as willing to impose them of the federal level.
7
Why only 50 laboratories ? Let's include all counties and cities, more possibilities. Instead of choosing single programs to scale nationally, why can't the Federal government act as an enabler, information broker, to implement more of a peer to peer approach among communities. Federalization tends to crowd out social innovation, and money tied to specific requirements stifles innovation. We have the technology now to truly empower people and communities to solve their own problems as much as possible.
3
That would require an enlightened class of hacks...er...political professionals displacing the entrenched and self-serving group currently draining the coffers that are topped-up with alarming regularity by the taxpaying People.
Ain't gonna happen in my lifetime, that's for sure.
Ain't gonna happen in my lifetime, that's for sure.
1
Not mentioned here is the huge effect of outside political money coming in to influence state politics, often on a single issue important to the donor. Much of this money can't be easily tracked. But local school board races in my city, which might have been waged with little expense in past years, are now attracting big dollars. The Koch brothers spent enormous sums in 2012 and 2014 electing state reps who would support their pet projects.
These are elections where many locals are not paying much attention--but certain big-money interests are, and they have literally bought themselves a statehouse here.
This is the post-Citizens United state of our states.
These are elections where many locals are not paying much attention--but certain big-money interests are, and they have literally bought themselves a statehouse here.
This is the post-Citizens United state of our states.
14
Interestingly, the ACA was the result of a state innovation. A Republican governor, Mitt Romney, pioneered it in Massachusetts, where it was deemed a success. The legislation that made it a national law tried to allow for state discretion in how the law was implemented; hence the fact that some states launched their own exchanges and others did not. The success of Obamacare would seem to defy the conclusion of this article that states are no longer the laboratories of democracy; however, the fact that Congress is trying, once again, to destroy it may support the author's point.
Sadly, the very party that created the concept for the ACA and then pioneered it at the state level promptly disclaimed it when it was proposed at the national level, purely out of political spite. Maybe it is politics that has rendered states incapable of being laboratories for democracy.
Sadly, the very party that created the concept for the ACA and then pioneered it at the state level promptly disclaimed it when it was proposed at the national level, purely out of political spite. Maybe it is politics that has rendered states incapable of being laboratories for democracy.
14
Another point to consider is that, as a general rule, states are actually a bit easier for lobbyists to control. If a state capitol is not located in that state's largest city, it is likely that the state's largest newspaper is not located their either. This means less oversight by the press, although one might argue that newspapers in general are doing less muckraking anyway due to budget contraints. And TV and other news sources tend not to devote a lot of resources to state capitols either, unless a state government is doing something outrageous or controversial. So it's much easier (and cheaper) for lobbyists to push their agendas at the state level while flying under the radar. This means any "experimentation" is likely to take whatever form the highest bidder desires, which is rarely in the best interests of most of that state's population, let alone that of the nation.
13
Many states have become party fiefdoms whose battle cry is to distrust the Federal government, rather than collaborate for the benefit of the whole. Finding the enemy out there is a lazy feint away from addressing and co-operating on long-term problems like global warming, crumbling infra-structure and gun violence, for instance. It's all rather short-term and panders to the immediate gratification appeal in both major parties.
13
Innovations at the state level died with the arrival of the oligarchy. ALEC now writes legislation at the state level on guns, prisons, education, collective bargaining, taxes and everything else. Their primary motivation is profit for the private sector. There are no laws being passed anymore unless it benefits the private corporate class. This empire is for them, not us.
65
While this article has a point, it got it wrong in one respect. Even if state "laboratory" results don't get replicated nationally, they can get replicated by other states. That may not have national sweep, but still sounds pretty useful to me.
17
I think there are two ways to think about the labratory of democracy issue. First, as the author seems to, as setting a positive example of what ought to be done across the nation, something that all states of good will should consider emulating. The author is right, to be a national model you probably have to represent a realistic, bi-partisan, even non-partisan approach to a common collective problem.
However, that is only one use of the labratory of democracy. The other huge and perhaps even more important use can only take place in a completely unilateral enviornment, namely it can serve as an unmuddled test bed for party orthodoxy in the real world. Forever, Republicans believed that lower taxes and reduced spending lead invetiably to economic growth. Every single previous attempt to prove how good or bad this policy truly is, met with failure, because bipartisans always found a way to compromise from an extremist positions, such that the conjecture was neither fully proved nor disproved to anyone's satisfaction.
The labratory of Kansas is a perfect example of a dispositive contradiction of this Republican narrative. Kansas' comparative collapse directly related to tax and spending cuts can be pointed to anytime Republican's claim that the national soultion is to cut taxes more. Similarly, California, long considered ungovernable (because of partisanship), is now a model of good governance thanks to approprate spending and tax policy by uncontested democrats.
However, that is only one use of the labratory of democracy. The other huge and perhaps even more important use can only take place in a completely unilateral enviornment, namely it can serve as an unmuddled test bed for party orthodoxy in the real world. Forever, Republicans believed that lower taxes and reduced spending lead invetiably to economic growth. Every single previous attempt to prove how good or bad this policy truly is, met with failure, because bipartisans always found a way to compromise from an extremist positions, such that the conjecture was neither fully proved nor disproved to anyone's satisfaction.
The labratory of Kansas is a perfect example of a dispositive contradiction of this Republican narrative. Kansas' comparative collapse directly related to tax and spending cuts can be pointed to anytime Republican's claim that the national soultion is to cut taxes more. Similarly, California, long considered ungovernable (because of partisanship), is now a model of good governance thanks to approprate spending and tax policy by uncontested democrats.
49
Keep a close eye on California and Texas. Though very different, these two could probably succeed as independent nations, and they come closest to the "laboratory" model. Smaller polities like Kansas and Vermont don't really provide scalable exemplars.
5
"The 50 laboratories of democracy will produce many so-called cures, but none of them will go down very well in our nation’s capital."
GOOD
GOOD
They worry that successful state policies might not translate well to the federal level, even under ideal conditions — witness the skepticism with which Congressional Republicans greeted President Obama’s announcement last week of a new initiative to help students attend community college, based on a program in Tennessee.
======================
They were right to be skeptical as the president announced this grand plan to give free education to millions without bothering to come up with any mechanism for funding it. In a period of extensive deficits
======================
They were right to be skeptical as the president announced this grand plan to give free education to millions without bothering to come up with any mechanism for funding it. In a period of extensive deficits
My first question when I heard of Obama's grand...and somewhat expensive...gesture was: What's high school supposed to accomplish.
My second question was: Isn't this a somewhat grand admission that our high schools are not turning out students capable of making it in the real world?
I would appreciate the liberal...er...progressive give a straight answer to these core questions as it will reveal how they perceive the reality of the world today.
My second question was: Isn't this a somewhat grand admission that our high schools are not turning out students capable of making it in the real world?
I would appreciate the liberal...er...progressive give a straight answer to these core questions as it will reveal how they perceive the reality of the world today.
1
With our current state/federal government "staff," I think it is highly unlikely that reasonable people will see "progress" from backward conservatives. Their goal is to go back, not move forward, unless it's to steamroll vulnerable members of our society.
3
Just because Liberals call what you seek "progressive" hardly makes it so.
If you mean more and more freedoms removed from States and individuals; more and more entitlements paid for by confiscating other peoples' money; more and more decisions coming from Washington instead of cities, counties, and states, then that is not progress, it is regression to ancient forms of governing that resembles fiefdom.
And Republicans should indeed do all they can to derail those plans to turn America into Norway or France, or worse: WWII Fascist Italy.
If you mean more and more freedoms removed from States and individuals; more and more entitlements paid for by confiscating other peoples' money; more and more decisions coming from Washington instead of cities, counties, and states, then that is not progress, it is regression to ancient forms of governing that resembles fiefdom.
And Republicans should indeed do all they can to derail those plans to turn America into Norway or France, or worse: WWII Fascist Italy.
Your allegation, while containing truth about the liberal...er..progressive not being willing to see a conservative approach as being "progress", misses completely any understanding of what the "conservative" intends.
The essence of the "conservative", both with and without the capital letter" is to maintain, i.e., conserve, those gains that have been made rather than to throw them out on the speculation that the "new and improved" might actually be either "new" or in any was "improved".
I do not argue that Brownback's Kansas has been effective, or, for that matter even conservative. But his actions have clearly shown that which is not viable. And isn't that what a laboratory is suppose to show? What works and what doesn't?
If all experiments were to be infallible, there would be absolutely no need for experiments in the first place, wouldn't you think?
Sorry. Straw-man arguments remain straw man arguments no matter how you dress them up and change the name of their stuffing.
The essence of the "conservative", both with and without the capital letter" is to maintain, i.e., conserve, those gains that have been made rather than to throw them out on the speculation that the "new and improved" might actually be either "new" or in any was "improved".
I do not argue that Brownback's Kansas has been effective, or, for that matter even conservative. But his actions have clearly shown that which is not viable. And isn't that what a laboratory is suppose to show? What works and what doesn't?
If all experiments were to be infallible, there would be absolutely no need for experiments in the first place, wouldn't you think?
Sorry. Straw-man arguments remain straw man arguments no matter how you dress them up and change the name of their stuffing.
I hate to break the news to Professor Chatterji, but the states do have new ideas. In fact the state of Tennessee, a very conservative red state, is leading the way. At year, Governor Bill Haslam proposed that the state pay the tuition of high school graduates to attend a two year community college. The proposal was accepted an approved by the Republican dominated state legislature. Last week, President Obama visited Knoxville, Tennessee, to announce a similar program for the entire nation based on the Tennessee model. Over the last year, the New York Times had several articles about community colleges in New York, some dealing with the difficulties students have in paying tuition and completing their degrees. In that regard it’s interesting how a blue state like NY, which its high taxes, can’t pay for two-years of community college, but a red state like TN, without a state income tax, can afford to do this. I guess it’s just a matter of priorities. At any rate, don’t say the state don’t have new ideas, because it’s simply not true.
17
Has it occurred to anyone that such an incentive will bring a large number of people to community colleges who don't belong there and should actually be going to trade schools or apprenticeships? The mission of community colleges is already amorphous and ill-defined: all things to all comers, it is in some cases trade training (e.g, medical technician and similar business skills courses); sometimes remedial; sometimes college prep; sometimes community enrichment courses for adults (cooking, fencing, etc). Is it possible this could be a step toward making the community college a substitute for the high school diploma as a guarantee of bare-bones basic literacy (which the HS diploma long ago ceased to be) and toward turning our public high schools even more into holding pens? If so, my feelings about that are mixed, because at present the four-year degree serves that purpose. Shifting that burden to community colleges might restore some dignity and meaning to the four-year degree. (Maybe the Wizard had the right idea with the Scarecrow. We can just give everyone a diploma and have done with it.)
1
I am by no means as well qualified as Mr. Chatterji to offer an informed opinion on this issue, but I beg to differ on the ultimate purpose of federalism. The op-Ed says that the point of federalism is to promote the democratic experience in 50 states so that, in a form of political Darwinism, the best ideas ultimately spread across the land. This is a sort of bottom-up substitute for a strong, command-and-control central government. While political ideas in Wisconsin may not be popular in New York, and vice versa, that doesn't mean the experiment has failed. If you like a weaker federalism, like Canada's, you might think it works just fine when states develop and maintain laws that are unique to their circumstances and unwanted by other states. Many good ideas that were unachievable at the federal level have spread across the states by adoption. Judging from the comments below, many states' ideas have not spread beyond their borders. Ther is nothing wrong with that, unless you believe that the U.S. is monolithic and uniform. It is not.
1
Why would any other state want to adopt Gov. Brownback's tax cuts? They have been a complete and utter disaster.
And why is there no mention of ALEC, the right-wing organization which writes legislation for many states?
Many state legislatures have become a hotbed of craziness, and stewpot for unworkable or perverse right-wing ideas.
And why is there no mention of ALEC, the right-wing organization which writes legislation for many states?
Many state legislatures have become a hotbed of craziness, and stewpot for unworkable or perverse right-wing ideas.
12
Basically states are "red" more than ever. This will lead to more decisions as Kansas made and put their balance sheets further into the red!
1
How can this be done when states are not able to print money the way the federal government can do and has over the past few years to the tune of trillions of dollars...most of which has turned up in the inflated stock prices that are seen today on Wall Street and in the smaller exchanges around the world?
1
To innovate requires the unique mix of big ideas and small execution ---both ingredients, whether in national or state government, are not in the DNA of our political class. Think of the combination of "big idea" John Boehner and the small execution of Obamacare and you get the picture.
Another reason state policies don't scale up well is because a state can always export the consequences of its policies to other states. E.g., solving your unemployment, public assistance, and/or homeless problems via Greyhound. The federal level is generally where the buck stops - although there are things we export to other countries, generally that's confined to jobs, capital gains, armaments, troops, etc.
3
Yes, politics at the state level is often as toxic as it is nationally. This highly partisan state of affairs will pass, eventually. It will fade, to a degree, once Obama's second term ends, because some significant part of it is fueled by racism, which not only lingers on but is practically dominant in the current Grand Old Tea Party. It may revive among aging white males, if the next president is a woman, but that will pass too. Our changing demographics, with the prospect of an emerging majority of minorities, which may have already begun, will also ignite partisanship, especially on the right, but will fade as well once the right loses election after election. I doubt that all this means that the states once again become laboratories for democracy, if they ever were, but at least there is the chance that our politics becomes less toxic in time.
4
Let's be honest Professor. The reason you don't want the states to become laboratories - citing that 60% of them have single party rule - is the overwhelming majority of that single-party rule is Republican.
Liberals fear Republican ideas having the opportunity to work, not just because they are ideologically opposed to them, but because they are afraid they will be successful.
Liberals fear Republican ideas having the opportunity to work, not just because they are ideologically opposed to them, but because they are afraid they will be successful.
3
Nonsense. In many states there was a long tradition of parties working together for the common good of citizens, hammering out compromises which worked, correcting policies which failed. Then the GOP started to work for the Koch brothers' agenda instead. Ideas that once were accepted by both parties became ideologically toxic in the GOP. Unless one accepts as success the "texanization" of the economy in which job growth is in low wage, low skill jobs or cyclical jobs dependent on fossil fuels, and inequality continues to expand, the GOP ideas have failed miserably to create healthy communities for all citizens. So, no, liberals are not afraid the GOP "ideas" will succeed, we are concerned the damages will be too severe for us to fix.
5
If there were controls in economic experiments, Republican ideas would have been dismissed as ineffective long ago.
5
The real change in America is the further and faster retreat from the ideals of a republic. Thomas Paine wrote: "This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty…. Hither they have fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster…” Bit by bit America recreated itself as that monster.
Americans just “adore” rank and wealth; they are also more superstitious than before. Our ruling economists predate Adam Smith or cherry pick from his work and forget that he wrote not just “…Wealth of Nations,” but another major work on “…Moral Sentiments” that showed a moral context for a free market.
Our history: the slaughter and dispossession of the original inhabitants; the curse of slavery and its continuing consequences; wars of expansion; covert subversion of foreign governments; our embroilment in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our support for Israel, however noble, and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, however necessary, have long fueled terrorism of Middle East origin. America’s blundering in the region has increased that terrorism. Meanwhile, the only new ideas we can expect from the States are justifications for the further repression of the weak.
Americans just “adore” rank and wealth; they are also more superstitious than before. Our ruling economists predate Adam Smith or cherry pick from his work and forget that he wrote not just “…Wealth of Nations,” but another major work on “…Moral Sentiments” that showed a moral context for a free market.
Our history: the slaughter and dispossession of the original inhabitants; the curse of slavery and its continuing consequences; wars of expansion; covert subversion of foreign governments; our embroilment in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our support for Israel, however noble, and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, however necessary, have long fueled terrorism of Middle East origin. America’s blundering in the region has increased that terrorism. Meanwhile, the only new ideas we can expect from the States are justifications for the further repression of the weak.
6
Laboratories for Democracy? In the case of a lot of these GOP run places, bad science experiments I'd say. Like the time I mixed hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, and copper pellets in IPS lab in 1972. The resultant puff of green toxic gas was reminiscent of many of their efforts....
3
"Money is the mother's milk of politics." -Jesse M. Unruh
If it can get worse, it will. The monopolization of power, and the ability to reward and punish groups that support you, and those that don't, seems to have never been greater. If there is one issue that most of the electorate should be able to coalesce around, it should be this.
If it can get worse, it will. The monopolization of power, and the ability to reward and punish groups that support you, and those that don't, seems to have never been greater. If there is one issue that most of the electorate should be able to coalesce around, it should be this.
2
The author's choices of Race to the Top and Common Core as "innovations" that had been "proven" to work in individual states are unfortunate. Neither one of those policy ideas has been proven to work anywhere.
1
What do you mean don't look to the states for new ideas? Last week President Obama came to Knoxville, Tennessee, to announce a proposal that each and every child in the USA, who graduates from high school, will be entitled to a free, yes free, 2 year college education. That idea did not come from the left wing "idiotlogs" who run the Department of Education, but from the State of Tennessee, a very conservative red state. So, the author should have written "don't look to the blue state for new ideas" because they are coming from the red states. If the liberals in the blue states, which make up the rightly called "porn belt" are so smart, then why don't they come up with new ideas. Well, they don't have any to come up with, they lack originality, they lack a vision for the country, other than increased taxes and useless socialized programs. Well that's all going to stop soon. And it can't happen soon enough for the sake of our great nation! Cheers!
So this should be re-titled "Why We Won't See Liberal Initiatives from the States." In fact, several policies have translated very well from state to state, without going through the Federal government. A case in point is concealed carry laws, which have moved in a few decades from Florida to all 50 states. But that's not "progressive," so never mind.
1
i'd just poi t out that there's a tad bit of diff between getting policies enacted and showing that they have the alightest positive value.
4
Claiming a particularly regressive law like concealed is more a reason to abolish transference of laws from state to state. I hope you don't include the "stand your ground laws" as an accomplishment. It's far more a cancer to our nation.
4
So I guess several states' voter ID laws, California's election reforms, and Colorado's legalized medical marijuana aren't sufficient experiments?
3
This opinion is supported by no facts that show that the States are in any less a position to be innovative then they were any time before in this Country's history. Likewise, there is no showing that this Country is any more corrupt than before. The States' recent experimentation has had a great influence on the federal government: for example, look at Obamacare, versions of which were first seen in Massachusetts and Maine, and the legalization of gay marriage at the State level, which has resulted in the amplification of rights for federal gay employees and their partners. The synergy between the State and federal governments is potent. It ebbs and flows over the course of time but it remains a significant engine of reform and change.
1
The heart of the problem is the basic construct--that states can be laboratories where new ideas can be tested and proven as worthy of pursuing at the national level--is no longer valid on the "new" standard.
Brownback unveiled his radical tax "reform"--which could be accuarately described as "supply side on steroids"--with "Dr." Arthur Laffer--the same "expert" who helped Reagan--30 years ago--launch an ongoing supply side economic experiment that has failed to deliver anything other than exploding debt, crumbling infrastructure, and Gilded Era levels of income inequality.
Brownback's effort was part and parcel of what has become the central animating principle in American conservatism today--to wit the delusion that three plus decades of conservative hegemony, policy, and governance hasn't been an utter failure because it never happened--it was all just an illusion peddled by an embedded "liberal" bureaucracy and a duplicitous "liberal" media--Brownback's goal was to "prove" supply side theory would have worked if it had just bee done "right."
The red states in America aren't interested in finding a new way to do anything--they're trying to prove we lost our way when we abandoned the birth control policies of the 1950, outlawed child labor, convinced doctors to no longer accept chickens as payment, and freed the slaves.
Brownback unveiled his radical tax "reform"--which could be accuarately described as "supply side on steroids"--with "Dr." Arthur Laffer--the same "expert" who helped Reagan--30 years ago--launch an ongoing supply side economic experiment that has failed to deliver anything other than exploding debt, crumbling infrastructure, and Gilded Era levels of income inequality.
Brownback's effort was part and parcel of what has become the central animating principle in American conservatism today--to wit the delusion that three plus decades of conservative hegemony, policy, and governance hasn't been an utter failure because it never happened--it was all just an illusion peddled by an embedded "liberal" bureaucracy and a duplicitous "liberal" media--Brownback's goal was to "prove" supply side theory would have worked if it had just bee done "right."
The red states in America aren't interested in finding a new way to do anything--they're trying to prove we lost our way when we abandoned the birth control policies of the 1950, outlawed child labor, convinced doctors to no longer accept chickens as payment, and freed the slaves.
4
The analysis of Race to the Top is off the mark. The "prize money" was used to force states to adopt some form of "value-added" evaluation of teachers based on standardized test results, a practice that has no statistical validity whatsoever. It required states to adopt the Common Core so that a de facto national examination could replace those in place at the State level. It opened the door states to open more for-profit charter schools whose track record is no better than public schools and whose management practices have been called to question in several states across the country. And the Common Core was NOT the President's idea but rather that of corporate America who did not join in the fight when conservative states pushed back. The teachers unions did not oppose the Common Core per se: they opposed the mandated use of tests to evaluate them using the "value added" methods cited above. Look at VT if you want to see a state that remains an incubator for education: it rejected RTTT.
1
The thesis of this piece, sounding somewhat sinister, is that states cannot serve as a template for broad federal action. But why is that an issue? Better that the states serve as experiments in the uncertain effort at crafting policy solutions and legislation that are then tested empirically. One suspects, given recent trends, that this will advantage Republicans, heavily actually, and that in turn citizens will vote with their feet as to where they live. Thus, if people want Mr. Cuomo's anti-Second Amendment laws and crushing taxes, they are free to move there. Those preferring personal liberty and lighter government will not. Similar points can be made about health care policy (see Vermont's sensible cold feet on single payer), the minimum wage, and other "issues."
Of course we are all stuck with bad ideas when policies are enacted at the federal level. Perhaps that is really why Democrats find federalism so distasteful?
Of course we are all stuck with bad ideas when policies are enacted at the federal level. Perhaps that is really why Democrats find federalism so distasteful?
4
There's another, larger reason why the states are not "laboratories of democracy" anymore. And it has to do with the root of all of America's problems, and that is the overwhelming power of the rising plutocratic corporatocracy.
The Federal Government, as corrupted as it has been by "defense", banking and fossil-fuel corporations, is still much more high-profile and likely to be watched than the much smaller state legislatures, which do much of what they do without any serious coverage by the corporatized news media. This means that these smaller legislatures are easy game for the high-powered bottomless-pocketed lobbyists who swarm over every state capitol in the nation. So any initiative that promises more economic equality or fairness for the individual; or that seeks to alleviate problems facing us all, like global warming, is killed before it can get past a first draft. And that is the root of the problem in a nutshell.
I'm from Texas. 'Nuff said.
The Federal Government, as corrupted as it has been by "defense", banking and fossil-fuel corporations, is still much more high-profile and likely to be watched than the much smaller state legislatures, which do much of what they do without any serious coverage by the corporatized news media. This means that these smaller legislatures are easy game for the high-powered bottomless-pocketed lobbyists who swarm over every state capitol in the nation. So any initiative that promises more economic equality or fairness for the individual; or that seeks to alleviate problems facing us all, like global warming, is killed before it can get past a first draft. And that is the root of the problem in a nutshell.
I'm from Texas. 'Nuff said.
7
"Every technocrat in Washington dreams of finding a successful policy at the state level, an early childhood education program in North Carolina or a creative prison reform initiative in Texas, and using it as a model for federal legislation."
The article clearly explains that our system fails to fulfill the dreams of Washington technocrats. How is that a problem for the rest of us? Seems like the system, by frustrating these dreams, is working as designed.
The article clearly explains that our system fails to fulfill the dreams of Washington technocrats. How is that a problem for the rest of us? Seems like the system, by frustrating these dreams, is working as designed.
This article convincingly argues that the states have not done as well as expected in generating good ideas that other states or the federal government could follow. On the other hand, much of what is learned in scientific laboratories comes from adverse findings. The process in the case of public policy laboratories is slow -- because of many politicians' unwillingness to learn from evidence they don't like -- but eventually the disasterous consequences of bad policies (such as the refusal to expand Medicare in some states) are likely to become undeniable and a political liability. So, the laboratory of the states may provide valuable lessons in what not to do.
1
"Finally, all politics aside, while tax revenues have been increasing recently, many states remain cash-strapped since the Great Recession, limiting their (states') ability to initiate significant economic or social programs of any kind."
I completely disagree. On the economic front, look to Colorado and its already billion dollar marijuana industry generating millions in state tax revenues. It looks like such a good deal that we're discussing the decriminalization of pot even here in Virginia, a first step towards complete legalization. Thomas Jefferson would be proud. On the social front, the states have lead the way on gay rights and gay marriage, in complete contradiction to the federal position defined by DOMA. Leading politicians of all stripes have pivoted on this, thanks to the actions taken by many states. And it's only a matter of time before full-blown federal policy supports each of these two issues.
The author of this piece may have glittering credentials attached to his name, but perhaps he needs to get out of the think tank a little more and look around.
I completely disagree. On the economic front, look to Colorado and its already billion dollar marijuana industry generating millions in state tax revenues. It looks like such a good deal that we're discussing the decriminalization of pot even here in Virginia, a first step towards complete legalization. Thomas Jefferson would be proud. On the social front, the states have lead the way on gay rights and gay marriage, in complete contradiction to the federal position defined by DOMA. Leading politicians of all stripes have pivoted on this, thanks to the actions taken by many states. And it's only a matter of time before full-blown federal policy supports each of these two issues.
The author of this piece may have glittering credentials attached to his name, but perhaps he needs to get out of the think tank a little more and look around.
4
In fact, state one party control permits us to see the consequences of "laboratory condition" political experiments over the course of an entire multi-year cycle, allowing -- dare I say it -- for "once and for all" proof.
Kansas, for example, is already showing that deep tax cuts for the wealthy don't raise overall revenue because:
1) The decision by the wealthy to re-locate in a given state is not only determined by tax rates; but by many issues, including, the level of services, education, etc. and efficient governance (i.e. balanced budget), on display, which are adversely affected when taxes are slashed. Hence the paradox. Similarly, it may have the unintended opposite effect of prompting some of the wealthy to leave the state, because they don't want to live in an environment where a lot of visible poverty is on display.
2) There is no guarantee the gains from the tax savings stay in the state anyway. So the consumption by "a lot of" lower income people as tax revenue is applied and cycled through the local economy is replaced by "savings" of a few at the top, which can go anywhere where a higher return is sought, including outside of the U.S. itself.
Kansas, for example, is already showing that deep tax cuts for the wealthy don't raise overall revenue because:
1) The decision by the wealthy to re-locate in a given state is not only determined by tax rates; but by many issues, including, the level of services, education, etc. and efficient governance (i.e. balanced budget), on display, which are adversely affected when taxes are slashed. Hence the paradox. Similarly, it may have the unintended opposite effect of prompting some of the wealthy to leave the state, because they don't want to live in an environment where a lot of visible poverty is on display.
2) There is no guarantee the gains from the tax savings stay in the state anyway. So the consumption by "a lot of" lower income people as tax revenue is applied and cycled through the local economy is replaced by "savings" of a few at the top, which can go anywhere where a higher return is sought, including outside of the U.S. itself.
3
The piece points to a few successes, then several failures, as though that will always be the norm. But isn't it inherent in an experimental "laboratory" that there will be many failures before there are a few successes? i suspect the legalization of marijuana will spread, albeit slowly. And I will guess that increases in the gas tax at the state level will convince some politicians, otherwise wed to the "no taxes" pledge that the world won't end if they tack another nickel onto the price of a gallon of gas. Are there others? Sure. In education, in banking regulation, in infrastructure, in social programs and more.
Social Security came about decades after the first state pension programs, universal education didn't happen all at once, everywhere, and even animal rights and gay marriage are issues still evolving, years after having been introduced in one state or another. In this hurry-up give-it-to-me-now world it still takes time, sometimes a lot of time. But it is happening, albeit not on the pace the author wants.
Social Security came about decades after the first state pension programs, universal education didn't happen all at once, everywhere, and even animal rights and gay marriage are issues still evolving, years after having been introduced in one state or another. In this hurry-up give-it-to-me-now world it still takes time, sometimes a lot of time. But it is happening, albeit not on the pace the author wants.
6
I thought it was curious that the author didn't mention the rise of interest groups writing and lobbying to pass "model" bills into law across as many states as possible. ALEC serves as the most successful/notorious example, and they are far from alone.
When state legislators find it easier or more politically expedient to copy proposed legislation from a third party instead of crafting it themselves, it severely limits the role those states can play in trying new and different ideas. Incidentally, it also gives those third parties a level of power and influence in the statehouse that harkens back to the Guilded Age, when railroad and extraction moguls in particular commonly dictated to state legislatures exactly what they would be enacting into law.
When state legislators find it easier or more politically expedient to copy proposed legislation from a third party instead of crafting it themselves, it severely limits the role those states can play in trying new and different ideas. Incidentally, it also gives those third parties a level of power and influence in the statehouse that harkens back to the Guilded Age, when railroad and extraction moguls in particular commonly dictated to state legislatures exactly what they would be enacting into law.
6
The author is looking for successful state programs that could be grown into enormous monolithic federal bureaucracies. The fact that there have been so few of these is not the point. Successful state programs can lead to similar programs in their neighbors, modified appropriately. Eventually, and only if necessary, the federal government can aid in funding those programs with block grants. This country was never designed (constitutionally) to be run top-down by bureaucrats in Washington D.C. It never was until Roosevelt, and repeated failures since then should teach us that there are very very few problems best solved by a federal program.
2
It's more likely that the cause of the drop-off in state-run social experiments that might be leverageable at the federal level is due to the fact that most of our states are broke. Having increased state income taxes to levels unheard of not that many years ago and other taxes in those few states that don't tax income, it's just not possible to increase them further. But the incessant demands for revenue to feed Medicaid requirements and unwise pension and healthcare promises to public sector workers have made it impossible for many of our states to make traditional investments in infrastructure and education. Illinois, for example, should have declared bankruptcy five years ago at least.
The most socially useful of such experiments could be educational in nature, and deal with severing the ineffective connection between primary and secondary public education and property taxes. But there simply isn't any money to even try: we're too busy feeding our own people and providing them their Band-Aids, responsibilities we once believed were those of individuals.
What's more, that experiments might be ideologically founded merely provide an opportunity to compare the effectiveness of such experiments and their underlying ideologies: there's no certainty that they wouldn't be valuable.
So, I agree that we're less likely to see imaginative experiments at the state level that might point the way to a better America; but I disagree that the primary cause is political polarization.
The most socially useful of such experiments could be educational in nature, and deal with severing the ineffective connection between primary and secondary public education and property taxes. But there simply isn't any money to even try: we're too busy feeding our own people and providing them their Band-Aids, responsibilities we once believed were those of individuals.
What's more, that experiments might be ideologically founded merely provide an opportunity to compare the effectiveness of such experiments and their underlying ideologies: there's no certainty that they wouldn't be valuable.
So, I agree that we're less likely to see imaginative experiments at the state level that might point the way to a better America; but I disagree that the primary cause is political polarization.
1
It's possible that scaling up state policies would work better if better state policies were chosen. All the educational policies mentioned in this piece (school vouchers, RTTT, and Common Core) were either failures at the state level or were untried (but were similar enough to existing policies that informed people expected them to fail or have little effect). The fact that the author doesn't know this undercuts his point.
Of course, by most accounts, Romneycare worked in Massachusetts and Obamacare seems (by most credible, which is to say non-FoxNews, accounts) to be working nationally, and that hasn't stopped the backlash, despite it being a case of a centrist President championing a right-wing policy and being called a socialist by the right wing for doing so. So probably, despite the author's errors on education policy, the central point of partisanship being the problem is a safe bet.
Of course, by most accounts, Romneycare worked in Massachusetts and Obamacare seems (by most credible, which is to say non-FoxNews, accounts) to be working nationally, and that hasn't stopped the backlash, despite it being a case of a centrist President championing a right-wing policy and being called a socialist by the right wing for doing so. So probably, despite the author's errors on education policy, the central point of partisanship being the problem is a safe bet.
6
The US is a great country because of the contribution the 52 states make to the country as a whole. If you were to consider each state as a country, most people are shocked to learn just how small they are compared to other countries. Example GDP of Rwanda is $7.4 Billion vs GSP of South Carolina is $172,176 Million.
So if the Republican party has been working neutralize the power of the Federal Government while empowering the individual States, Should the countries of the world decide to cooperate, what chance do we stand ?
So if the Republican party has been working neutralize the power of the Federal Government while empowering the individual States, Should the countries of the world decide to cooperate, what chance do we stand ?
1
$172,176 Million is $172 BILLION, quite larger than the $7.4 billion you quote for an admittedly non-first-world country. Do you not think a factor of 20+ is a noteworthy multiplier for a state with about 1/3 the population of your comparison country (4.8 million for SC, 12 million for Rwanda)?
1
California is 8th largest economy in the world, larger than Russia, smaller than Italy with about $2.050 trillion. That puts us 12x South Carolina by GDP and 8x larger in population.
2014 was a big year and our growth is accelerating.
2014 was a big year and our growth is accelerating.
1
Our 2 major parties must protect our Constitution's last word on state rights and individual ones; and conservatives calling for divisive policies targeting racial-ethnic minorities rather than expanding their racial and ethnic bases in some states ought to beware of adverse political consequences for our national unity. The United States ironically has never been united when states alone have decided state goverment policies. But we are compelled to act as one country united under one set of national laws. One result of our Constitution has been equall rights protections for all citizens. Now however as racial minorities become a larger percentage of the American population, we may see our national unity put to the test as some states achieve demographic majorities of different non-whites, effectively leading to governments dominated by non-whites as in New Mexico, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, GA., and Detroit, MI.' or conversely dominated by white Mormons as in Utah. The primacy of federal enforcement of our Constitution saves us from the kind of political fragmentation of Europe, the oppressive social class division maintained in the UK and the instability that broke apart the Soviet Union. A new conservative "Southern Strategy," for the 2016 Presidential campaign, intending to exploit white prejudices, could lead to racial and ethnic party politics. The G.O.P. especially needs more vigorous efforts to diversify its state parties.
2
The concept of seperate discrete "states" as existed at our founding is outmoded and old-fashioned. The founding fathers' idea of a "united states" of America was necessary, since the states themselves had seperate, distinct and individual cultures. Fast forward to today's culturally blended, interdependent systems of trade, ecological and environmental systems, and a well-travelled constantly re-locating population. Add to that an urban vs. rural lifestyle that makes a person in rural MA.have more in common with rural Californian and a Bostonian have more in common with a SanFranciscan.
States themselves are poor laboratories for experiments; Kentucky's coal ash, NYC's garbage, water for California's farms and guns sold freely in South Carolina compromise any attempt at management of their subsidiary costs. Low business taxes and/or personal income taxes and Casino gambling are a race to the bottom, a zero-sum game with only temporary benefits.
Add to that a welter of differing state regulations subject to local state legislatures filled with the mediocre and the bribable--who needs states ?So that John Cornyn who represents millions of Texans has a say in governing equal to Sheldon Whitehouse who represents a tiny bunch of Rhode Islanders? The there's the Electoral College, guaranteeing the all too-familiar sorts of perverse results of who becomes President and what deals with the devil he or she must make with farmers in Iowa, or NY hedge-funders to do so.
States themselves are poor laboratories for experiments; Kentucky's coal ash, NYC's garbage, water for California's farms and guns sold freely in South Carolina compromise any attempt at management of their subsidiary costs. Low business taxes and/or personal income taxes and Casino gambling are a race to the bottom, a zero-sum game with only temporary benefits.
Add to that a welter of differing state regulations subject to local state legislatures filled with the mediocre and the bribable--who needs states ?So that John Cornyn who represents millions of Texans has a say in governing equal to Sheldon Whitehouse who represents a tiny bunch of Rhode Islanders? The there's the Electoral College, guaranteeing the all too-familiar sorts of perverse results of who becomes President and what deals with the devil he or she must make with farmers in Iowa, or NY hedge-funders to do so.
5
Who said state programs were meant to be scaled to a national level? States were organized to impact daily living. The federal government's powers were to be limited to provide for the "general" welfare. Today, two-thirds of the federal budget is tranfer payments to individuals.
1
Nice try Mark but no cigar. "Today, two-thirds of the federal budget is tranfer payments to individuals." I guess you must be counting the gabillions of dollars "transferred" to line the pockets of defense and "homeland security" contractors. Please, Mark, try to remember that our "defense" expenditures dwarf the defense expenditures of the rest of the world and we have bases in over 100 countries and have waged seven wars in the last ten years. Don't even get me started on military equipment which is "abandoned" as we bail because it is not "cost effective" to move it.
3
Three points:
#1- Innovation rarely bubbles up from a committee. Divided legislatures are committees. States with one party control WILL probably produce more innovative ideas. That said, much like a mad scientist, they might not all be good solutions.
#2- Even good solutions on a state level will not necessarily translate to other states as pointed out in the OpEd. Sometimes they don't even work statewide.
#3- The U.S. is now a salad bowl and not a melting pot. Unfortunately many of those who celebrate our diversity are the same ones who want one-size-fits-all solutions from a centralized government, administered by bureaucrats often located thousands of miles from the location of the problem.
To paraphrase Sen. Pat Moynihan, "All solutions are local."
#1- Innovation rarely bubbles up from a committee. Divided legislatures are committees. States with one party control WILL probably produce more innovative ideas. That said, much like a mad scientist, they might not all be good solutions.
#2- Even good solutions on a state level will not necessarily translate to other states as pointed out in the OpEd. Sometimes they don't even work statewide.
#3- The U.S. is now a salad bowl and not a melting pot. Unfortunately many of those who celebrate our diversity are the same ones who want one-size-fits-all solutions from a centralized government, administered by bureaucrats often located thousands of miles from the location of the problem.
To paraphrase Sen. Pat Moynihan, "All solutions are local."
2
"The Medicaid expansion was intended to be a core pillar of the Affordable Care Act, but following a 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision, many states chose to opt out."
Bad example. The supposedly conservative Supreme Court majority instead chose overstep their Constitutional authority and unilaterally re-wrote a federal law. Their decision was illegitimate and should have been ignored. After all, the Supreme Court has no Constitutional authority to change or override federal legislation. All of its authority is based on precedent, and whenever they overstep their authority, it is the choice of the president to heed their advice or ignore it. Republicans should welcome such an approach, as this was a widely-supported view on the right throughout much of the 20th century and into the Bush II presidency. Dick Cheney, for example, opined that the president could ignore Supreme Court decisions.
Bad example. The supposedly conservative Supreme Court majority instead chose overstep their Constitutional authority and unilaterally re-wrote a federal law. Their decision was illegitimate and should have been ignored. After all, the Supreme Court has no Constitutional authority to change or override federal legislation. All of its authority is based on precedent, and whenever they overstep their authority, it is the choice of the president to heed their advice or ignore it. Republicans should welcome such an approach, as this was a widely-supported view on the right throughout much of the 20th century and into the Bush II presidency. Dick Cheney, for example, opined that the president could ignore Supreme Court decisions.
3
So more of the same do-little-of-consequence for the nation from Washington!
The nation’s capital is largely the domain of lobbyists, privileged access, big money interests, entrenched bureaucrats, and politicians more intent on their own political fortunes than on the challenging business of the people and the integrity and efficacy of governance.
More dysfunctional two party gridlock at the apex, more partisan political lockdown in the states.
The common man’s stratagem -- throwing the bums out -- does not work when the choices come from the same tainted source.
The founders where very leery of the political condition we the people have created -- endemic, diametric, political opposition and the persistent expansion of the powers of the central government and the concurrent diminution of genuine federalism.
Change will not be forthcoming as long as engaged and activist citizenship languishes.
The nation’s capital is largely the domain of lobbyists, privileged access, big money interests, entrenched bureaucrats, and politicians more intent on their own political fortunes than on the challenging business of the people and the integrity and efficacy of governance.
More dysfunctional two party gridlock at the apex, more partisan political lockdown in the states.
The common man’s stratagem -- throwing the bums out -- does not work when the choices come from the same tainted source.
The founders where very leery of the political condition we the people have created -- endemic, diametric, political opposition and the persistent expansion of the powers of the central government and the concurrent diminution of genuine federalism.
Change will not be forthcoming as long as engaged and activist citizenship languishes.
12
"The nation’s capital is largely the domain of lobbyists, privileged access, big money interests, entrenched bureaucrats, and politicians more intent on their own political fortunes than on the challenging business of the people and the integrity and efficacy of governance. "
As time marches on, the separate meanings of "capital" are becoming more confluent, as our citizens give more and more power to the capitalist puppet masters moving our politicians' lips. Citizens United? Typical Republican Orwellianism.
As time marches on, the separate meanings of "capital" are becoming more confluent, as our citizens give more and more power to the capitalist puppet masters moving our politicians' lips. Citizens United? Typical Republican Orwellianism.
3
The comments miss the point of federalism. Initiatives that work in a state should not be expanded to all states. That's the point. Therefore scaling has no need. Let different states do different things and the federal government butt out. Now I realize that some things require a federal standard to prevent chaos but most don't and when the federal government tries to nationalize things it's almost axiomatic that it will fail.
10
I find the logic concerning Medicaid expansion in this piece a bit strange. It does not seem to me an example of a problem due to trying to impose a one size-fits-all policy by the the Federal government but rather a problem due to a right wing Supreme Court giving state governments the freedom to deny coverage to their constituents. One wonders if with the present composition of the Supreme Court Social Security and Medicare would have past constitutional muster. I don't think most voters would consider them problematic one-size fit all programs.
18
Well apparently you don't understand. Where I live we already spend way too much on health care for the poor. We don't want to pay any more ever in fact we want to pay less. So lets return to the previous system for us, no expansion but some support for hospitals. We do have a custom proposal as well. Our voters don't want the Medicaid expansion.
"Declining to pay for coverage" and "Denying coverage" are two quite different things.
Actually, the law was intended to force states into the program and accept the federal dominance of their budgets. Democrats wrote the law. Live with it or enter in to negotiations with Republicans to change the law. You only have two choices.
This is what happens with one party controls the White House and Capitol hill and acts like they do not need the rest of the country to govern. Very foolish.
This is what happens with one party controls the White House and Capitol hill and acts like they do not need the rest of the country to govern. Very foolish.
The author neglects the opportunities to learn from mistakes made by the states.
A senior New Jersey budget official was invited to a national meeting of state budget officers to participate in a panel on managing state debt. At the end of the session, after all the others had provided their final comments, he was asked what, based on his experience, other states should do to manage state debt.
He replied, ''Don't do what New Jersey did.''
A senior New Jersey budget official was invited to a national meeting of state budget officers to participate in a panel on managing state debt. At the end of the session, after all the others had provided their final comments, he was asked what, based on his experience, other states should do to manage state debt.
He replied, ''Don't do what New Jersey did.''
22
Or Illinois, or California. Now to debt we should do as everyone should. Borrow for things that are valuable and have a term of usefulness equal to the debt. Calculate what we should have under this criteria, no borrowing for current spending at all. Then have a system to reduce our debt to that level over some period of time. Just as with individuals debt is not a good thing since the interest (no matter how little you think it is) is not available for current needs. So thus no problem in borrowing for new interstates but no borrowing for maintenance, and you need a revenue stream to pay the debt off.
1
Most of the states are controlled by the GOP.
That's why this article in published in this leftist Op Ed space.
That's why this article in published in this leftist Op Ed space.
10
Typical and expected.
The fear of change has gripped this country and have become a part of the culture...everything is politicized and therefore nothing gets done....whether it be at the state or federal levels. While we fiddle the world passes us by...Kansas has closed schools in order to meet its budget (radical right)....Connecticut has threatened its healthcare structure by cow-towing to unions by not considering the for profit model....both parties are to blame and the motivational factor is $$$$.
The fear of change has gripped this country and have become a part of the culture...everything is politicized and therefore nothing gets done....whether it be at the state or federal levels. While we fiddle the world passes us by...Kansas has closed schools in order to meet its budget (radical right)....Connecticut has threatened its healthcare structure by cow-towing to unions by not considering the for profit model....both parties are to blame and the motivational factor is $$$$.
1
So you agree or disagree with which point? Identifying the NYT editorial space as leftist is your opinion, but what's your point? Any other point, like you think republican states are, indeed, laboratories for innovation? I live in the reddest of red states and we lead, oh yes we do...in obesity, heart disease, teen pregnancy, smoking (cigarettes), tax cuts, unsafe bridges, earthquakes(!) and poor education (we're number 2! ...from the bottom. So I hope our governor and legislators are innovative and forward thinking and can help get us out of this mess. Always hopeful, but it seems they're more interested in outlawing hoodies. That might catch on in some other states.
4
The polarization of politics at the state level is stifling innovation just as much as polarization at the federal level but the real issue is the unwillingness of either political party to consider a good idea no matter where it originates. The scaling issue works both ways and Kansas is the example writ large. Friends and relatives who live in Kansas (but either left or are leaving as soon as possible) incessantly heard from local Republicans and Republicans from outside the state that it was time to fully implement the Republican dream since Reagan of cutting taxes to increase growth and revenue that they could not do nationally and prove that it would work out just fine. Needless to say, the experiment is crumbling around them. Ever notice that Republicans in other states or nationally are no longer pointing to Kansas as an example or complaining about errors in the implementation? Even Fox News has run away as fast as it can and if you lose Fox News, you lose the support from conservatives.
50
Gee what polarization. Around here folks who treat their government money carefully control and in most states that is the case. That is why most states are controlled by Republicans.
That is Tennessee. What you see in your state may not be true in others.
Admit it. The United States is not united, partly because of the Constitution's clauses, and mostly because of the trifecta in Washington, D.C. What has happened since the 1990s with the Eric Holder memo, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, NAFTA, two unwinnable wars, the Great Recession, the bogus recovery, the outsourcing of highways and city parking to foreign investors (with the aid of Goldman Sachs), and the "Affordable Care Act," is that the country is on a trajectory to hell, not in a hand basket, but in a supersonic jet. Anyone who doesn't know about the Holder memo and other behind-the-scenes dealings must read Matt Taibbi's books, Griftopia and The Divide.
15
The author left out perhaps the most important reason why the states are unlikely to lead us going forward - that is, the influence of ALEC, the Koch brothers organization that pimps ideological solutions regardless of whether they have either a track record or prayer of working, and increasingly sets the agenda for most Red states.
Because of the influence of groups like ALEC, a state like Kansas can fall utterly on its face, and that failure will not materially change the legislative or governing agenda.
If these states represent any kind of laboratory, it is that of a deranged scientist, not that any kind of reputable researcher.
So long as so many Americans remains the dupes of high-net worth charlatans and their propagandists, states governments will increasingly become an even greater part of our problem.
Because of the influence of groups like ALEC, a state like Kansas can fall utterly on its face, and that failure will not materially change the legislative or governing agenda.
If these states represent any kind of laboratory, it is that of a deranged scientist, not that any kind of reputable researcher.
So long as so many Americans remains the dupes of high-net worth charlatans and their propagandists, states governments will increasingly become an even greater part of our problem.
132
And the good people of Kansas voted overwhelmingly to stay the course. Go figure.
2
The Affordable Care Act was hardly a federal policy success. The only reason it became one was democrats cluelessly voted for something that was deceptively sold to Americans by a very capable and somewhat dishonest salesman, President Obama.
If anything, what happened in MA and then in VT should be case studies in why they should not become federal programs, or at least not until the cost containment features have been worked out.
If anything, what happened in MA and then in VT should be case studies in why they should not become federal programs, or at least not until the cost containment features have been worked out.
11
Good points but cost containment is not sufficient. The facts are that there is no way to reduce the rate of growth of health care other than to reduce the need for it. Now being more healthy would be great, but we actually force people to reduce consumption by making it unaffordable.
It has worked pretty well for me. I had been in the individual market (self employed) with heart disease, made insurance VERY expensive, that price has dropped considerably (and no I make way more than would allow subsidies, my out of pocket way down almost by half). So not a failure at all. Is it perfect, no of course not Medicare for All would have been far better than this but the political system where the financial industry has such an outsized (thanks to the SCOTUS) influence would never have tolerated shifting premiums to Medicare. With Medicare for All businesses of all sizes could finally devote all their efforts to business instead of half the HR team devoted to dealing with health insurance issues. But right wingers like you want business in the US hamstrung by issues like this that their overseas competitors don't have to deal with.
3
The Affordable Care Act is already bending the curve on healthcare costs, so much so that it has already significantly improved the fiscal health of the nation.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-05/obamacare-effect-linked-to-lowe...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-05/obamacare-effect-linked-to-lowe...
4
It's telling that in seeking a Republican reform to contrast with socially supportive reforms sought by Democrats, the author has cited Sam Brownback's Kansas, which is facing multiple ratings agency downgrades for its increasingly worthless bonds.
All of this discord makes more sense once you step back and notice that America is less a single nation than a continent-spanning empire containing smaller units, like the Old South, that rarely agree with any progressive legislation favored by the majority in America.
Europe, which without Russia spans fewer miles than the continental U.S., has struggled with a mere common currency. Sharing a monetary system requires shared trust, but suspicion abounds in Europe that someone is doing less than his share.
A similar suspicion infects those who are constantly bombarded with imaginary notions of Welfare Queens and Romney's Moochers (an excellent name for a garage band, if you ask me). In the more educated precincts of the Empire, imposing cruelty on the poor on a suspicion that a few of them might be driving to their panhandling jobs in Silver Clouds is considered ludicrous, but in some of the poorest, primarily white counties in the South welfare is reviled because some money might be going to you-know-who.
A continent-spanning Empire. Think about it.
Oh, and I can't wait to see what a creative prison reform in Texas looks like. In Oklahoma, apparently, it's letting tyros administer lethal cocktails to condemned prisoners.
All of this discord makes more sense once you step back and notice that America is less a single nation than a continent-spanning empire containing smaller units, like the Old South, that rarely agree with any progressive legislation favored by the majority in America.
Europe, which without Russia spans fewer miles than the continental U.S., has struggled with a mere common currency. Sharing a monetary system requires shared trust, but suspicion abounds in Europe that someone is doing less than his share.
A similar suspicion infects those who are constantly bombarded with imaginary notions of Welfare Queens and Romney's Moochers (an excellent name for a garage band, if you ask me). In the more educated precincts of the Empire, imposing cruelty on the poor on a suspicion that a few of them might be driving to their panhandling jobs in Silver Clouds is considered ludicrous, but in some of the poorest, primarily white counties in the South welfare is reviled because some money might be going to you-know-who.
A continent-spanning Empire. Think about it.
Oh, and I can't wait to see what a creative prison reform in Texas looks like. In Oklahoma, apparently, it's letting tyros administer lethal cocktails to condemned prisoners.
78
what does creative prison reform look like in NYC? or in your state?
where in the USA is a place so endowed with righteousness that the people there can look outward and demand reforms elsewhere because no reforms are needed in their own neighborhoods?
Old South deserves your opprobrium. But then, that's not where Eric Garner lived ... let's all take care of our own backyards. Old South needs it. How about your neighborhood?
where in the USA is a place so endowed with righteousness that the people there can look outward and demand reforms elsewhere because no reforms are needed in their own neighborhoods?
Old South deserves your opprobrium. But then, that's not where Eric Garner lived ... let's all take care of our own backyards. Old South needs it. How about your neighborhood?
Even after the downgrade, Kansas bonds have a AA rating, which puts them mid-pack among US states.
The most worthless bonds belong to California, New Jersey and Illinois. What the three have in common is that they are ruled by Democrats. Most of the states with AAA bonds are ruled by Republicans.
The most worthless bonds belong to California, New Jersey and Illinois. What the three have in common is that they are ruled by Democrats. Most of the states with AAA bonds are ruled by Republicans.
Well in Europe there are some countries mooching. And here we have a diverse country with different policies better for each. Try the Swiss which have states who have different policies for an example.
Instead of being laboratories of democracy they seem to have become laboratories of theocracy.
101
The suggestion that the United States is a functioning democracy is ludicrous on its face.
The dominance of legalized bribery at both the federal and state level of elected office has ensured that dollarocracy flourishes and democracy languishes.
Part of dollarocracy's success ensures voter suppression through many avenues to ensure that people's will is systematically thwarted across the fruited plains --- by hiring Republicans to pass voter suppression laws, by supporting a massive propaganda and disinformation system to lie to the public about moneyed interests, by systematically underfinancing the public education system to ensure critical thinking skills are not developed by the masses, and by systematically suppressing worker wages so voters are too concerned with surviving to bother to politically inform themselves or vote, and by creating general voter apathy over the massive corruption in the electoral system.
Justice Louis D. Brandeis left the Supreme Court in 1939 when FDR was President and America still had a functioning democracy.
If he were alive today, he would be appalled at the extent of the bribeocracy and 'dark money' flushing through the 'electoral' system.
There are almost no legislators left in America's 'electoral' system - just 'fundraisers'.
RIP, America.
The dominance of legalized bribery at both the federal and state level of elected office has ensured that dollarocracy flourishes and democracy languishes.
Part of dollarocracy's success ensures voter suppression through many avenues to ensure that people's will is systematically thwarted across the fruited plains --- by hiring Republicans to pass voter suppression laws, by supporting a massive propaganda and disinformation system to lie to the public about moneyed interests, by systematically underfinancing the public education system to ensure critical thinking skills are not developed by the masses, and by systematically suppressing worker wages so voters are too concerned with surviving to bother to politically inform themselves or vote, and by creating general voter apathy over the massive corruption in the electoral system.
Justice Louis D. Brandeis left the Supreme Court in 1939 when FDR was President and America still had a functioning democracy.
If he were alive today, he would be appalled at the extent of the bribeocracy and 'dark money' flushing through the 'electoral' system.
There are almost no legislators left in America's 'electoral' system - just 'fundraisers'.
RIP, America.
227
Perhaps Justice Brandeis would have been selectively appalled.
http://ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/history.html
http://ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/history.html
Your analysis hit me like a punch in my gut.
It is true. The democracy we grew up with
is dead. It is now war, and the outcome of
that will be political/corporate aristocracy
living off its "consumers" (formerly called
"citizens". Our only hope is for when "we
the consumers" stop consuming, to starve
the beasts - and that is a dangerous, dark,
terrible hope.
It is true. The democracy we grew up with
is dead. It is now war, and the outcome of
that will be political/corporate aristocracy
living off its "consumers" (formerly called
"citizens". Our only hope is for when "we
the consumers" stop consuming, to starve
the beasts - and that is a dangerous, dark,
terrible hope.
5
I can't point to a single US politician who I feel represents my views.
2
Really nice piece. We have devolved into many single party Soviet type structures where debate and descent are limited. Unfortunately this may take decades, not years, to reverse. So get used to it. And for my relatives in Kansas, you shoulda left when you were young. Too late now.
40
"And they have a point: It turns out scaling a successful state program often ends up with a one-size-fits-all policy that might work well in Ohio but fall flat in Arizona."
Isn't that THE point - de-centralize the power to the states. The interests of the urban coastal areas are different than the rural center. The anti-federalists had a reasonable point.
Isn't that THE point - de-centralize the power to the states. The interests of the urban coastal areas are different than the rural center. The anti-federalists had a reasonable point.
13
Yes; but it's a two way street. Small pockets of population with the status of "states" can dictate to the major centers of population because each state has two senators. The 20 least populous states have a population of less than 9 million, The 20 most populous have over 170 million--but each group has 40 senators. And the GOP gave us a master-class on senatorial obstruction for the past 6 years. The politics/religion/gun laws of the minority are foisted on large cities.
1
And thats what brought us to 1860.
2
So here we have an article that attempts to make the preemptive strike against an Article V convention of the state legislators in order to effectuate constitutional change that seeks to undo what our ruling elites have been doing to us for the past 25 years.
The ruling class is D.C. is in for a rude awakening. The gravy train is slowing down. Hopefully, one day it will stop altogether.
The ruling class is D.C. is in for a rude awakening. The gravy train is slowing down. Hopefully, one day it will stop altogether.
9
And its head, Obama, CEO of Federal Government, Inc., cannot be retired soon enough. We are all locked in a federal-government-centric world, while the global economy races on outside it.
The problem is that's where our future lies. Bring back business. Bring back competition. Bring back unions. Bring back jobs. It cannot happen soon enough. But it will not happen with this group in charge.
The problem is that's where our future lies. Bring back business. Bring back competition. Bring back unions. Bring back jobs. It cannot happen soon enough. But it will not happen with this group in charge.
6
Good grief! Have you paid any attention to the U.S. Economy lately?
1
No unions are a corrupt obsolete idea that we don't need any more. What we do need is the jobs that our demand creates or an offset by those with the jobs purchasing things from us that create jobs here. But what we get is more "free trade" which is basically a trade of jobs here for cheap stuff.
2
Unfortunately, your headline is correct - we will not get any new ideas from the states since most of the states are controlled by the GOP, lock, stock and barrel. Every last one of them care only about power and funneling of
federal dollars to their states and to their lobbyists and legislative owners and donors. Nowadays, power, perks and politics have eliminated original thinking. I believe we are headed for a giant collapse.
federal dollars to their states and to their lobbyists and legislative owners and donors. Nowadays, power, perks and politics have eliminated original thinking. I believe we are headed for a giant collapse.
73
You sound like the governor situation was imposed on you, rather than voted for. If states elect Repub governeors, that must be what the majority of the voters (who bothered to vote) wanted. How is this automatically bad??
You have the new ideas, government does much less, it taxes the citizens for those things that they are willing to pay for. We won't tax ourselves to support all the things that the federal government does so reduce it to its constitutional requirements and only those in addition that we all support.
I find this amusing since the richest counties in the US are all around DC.
The entire south is still mired in the 1850's, while the midwest is littered with governors bought and paid for by the 1%.
92
What about Governor Brown in California. There was a state in a terrible mess. He raised taxes and cut spending. California is in a much better fiscal condition as a result.
107
California highly depends upon Silicon Valley. During its booms, California manages to balance the budget. During its busts, the state's fiscal situation is a mess.
Despite this "improved" situation, California still has some of the worst bond ratings in the country and dismal schools as well. Not much to be proud of.
Despite this "improved" situation, California still has some of the worst bond ratings in the country and dismal schools as well. Not much to be proud of.
And the California election process that eliminates party primaries seems to be a bold experiment. It has eliminated the extreme wings and dampened gerrymandering.
4
In my opinion, the problem is very profound; any reform is based on what the money culture wants. I don't see any "reform" in the bettering of most people's lives, yet the very rich are living in a paradise.
Sorry, states rights has become a hoax.
Sorry, states rights has become a hoax.
49
There will be no experiments to uncover and develop new policies that work. All any state government wants to do right now is retrench and defend their beliefs from behind strong barracades.
This will probably work out better for Democrats then Republicans for the Democrats are likely to maintain a bare minimum of public education and some minimal public services. But both are going to let infrastructure languish and play around the edges of pension reform.
But asphalt will not fix itself. When the potholes begin to merge into craters I expect to see a groundswell form to wash these idiots away and let us get back to the work of running a civilization.
This will probably work out better for Democrats then Republicans for the Democrats are likely to maintain a bare minimum of public education and some minimal public services. But both are going to let infrastructure languish and play around the edges of pension reform.
But asphalt will not fix itself. When the potholes begin to merge into craters I expect to see a groundswell form to wash these idiots away and let us get back to the work of running a civilization.
25
What about legalization of marijuana? That is an idea that seems to be moving along. Is that an idea who's time has finally arrived?
5
Well perhaps for some states and that is great, keep the feds out of it entirely. I don't support another drug for people to use that creates issues.
Wait, so the States will still be laboratories of democracy, but since Washington is broken we will pretend they aren't?
MmmmOkay?
MmmmOkay?
5
That and the fact that they have republican governors.
7
To move forward, we should first look back.
The three decades after WWII have shown us the keys to shared prosperity - an equitable tax code, high rates of unionization, and regulation of Wall Street.
The apostles of neoliberalism have taken the wheel of democracy and veered so far off course that people seem to forget we have a brief history of a well-functioning polity in the United States. Income inequality has reached levels not seen since the Gilded Age; never have so little had so much at a time where so many have so little. This is a driving factor for the lack of political participation that we continue to see because people have reached the point where they know their voices dont matter. A tiny elite are pulling the strings of democracy in the U.S, shaping public policy to suit their own self-interest.
It is possible to regain control from the elite, and by no means will this be a *new idea*.
The three decades after WWII have shown us the keys to shared prosperity - an equitable tax code, high rates of unionization, and regulation of Wall Street.
The apostles of neoliberalism have taken the wheel of democracy and veered so far off course that people seem to forget we have a brief history of a well-functioning polity in the United States. Income inequality has reached levels not seen since the Gilded Age; never have so little had so much at a time where so many have so little. This is a driving factor for the lack of political participation that we continue to see because people have reached the point where they know their voices dont matter. A tiny elite are pulling the strings of democracy in the U.S, shaping public policy to suit their own self-interest.
It is possible to regain control from the elite, and by no means will this be a *new idea*.
34
The three decades after WWII have shown us the keys to shared prosperity - an equitable tax code, high rates of unionization, and regulation of Wall Street.
=================
Actually those could only exist because of no competition from foreign business as Europe and Japan had their industrial plants destroyed by WWII.
=================
Actually those could only exist because of no competition from foreign business as Europe and Japan had their industrial plants destroyed by WWII.
Really??? You think that the economic system is the same as then??? Unions??? Corrupt and obsolete replaced by government regulation. Regulations are strangling our country and of course the large and wealthy can adapt to them, the small and growing can't.
This is a frightening time. It seems that our ideas on how to govern have failed, that they have exhausted their potential. Add to that the hyper-partisan gridlock, and you have a recipe for disaster on a scale we haven't seen since the 1930s.
7
What do you mean by "govern"? There are plenty of good definitions of that term that don't involve new legislation or policy changes.
Gee I am only frightened by way too much government especially the US federal government. My sorrow for the issues in your country.
And then there's California and Jerry Brown. The problem is the lack of a national mega cultural cohesion. Americans are not getting better at handling systems and modernity. The Confederacy is not dead. California with its drought is still leading the nation in intellectual, political and cultural capital. It could be a country by itself and do just fine. North Carolina, Georgia or Florida could not. Ray Evans Harrell, NYCity performing arts teacher.
57
Over the past 10 years or so since we moved here we've met a ton of people who moved here from California. All middle and working class. They all say it's impossible to live there and the schools are failing. California also has the highest poverty rate in the nation. You need to look at everything carefully before stating a claim.
We will certainly see dogged GOP labors to expand government control of women's bodies and private medical decisions. Also expect new endeavors by Republicans to expand the spheres where guns can be legally carried, while also facilitating the unrestricted acquisition of firearms by almost anyone regardless of their safety training, arrest history or mental status.
30
Wisconsin showed the nation how to handle out of control public employee union benefits that are out of control, going in one cycle from huge deficits to surpluses. It is a model for the nation and is being copied.
Michigan and Indiana, passed right-to-work laws to become more competitive. It is being copied (Ohio, though there was a set back, and other places will follow).
Concealed carry laws were copied from state to state and are now the norm in the nation.
Gay marriage rights and laws spread from state to state.
Abortion restriction laws (parental consent, waiting period, late abortion bans) were copied from state to state.
And the list goes on.
Seems to me the author simply didn't do the homework.
Michigan and Indiana, passed right-to-work laws to become more competitive. It is being copied (Ohio, though there was a set back, and other places will follow).
Concealed carry laws were copied from state to state and are now the norm in the nation.
Gay marriage rights and laws spread from state to state.
Abortion restriction laws (parental consent, waiting period, late abortion bans) were copied from state to state.
And the list goes on.
Seems to me the author simply didn't do the homework.
16
Actually, Wisconsin now has a 2+ billion dollar deficit thanks to Mr. Walker. On the up-side though my property taxes went down by about 50 bucks. "Seems to me the author simply didn't do the homework".
4
Ah, but with the possible exception of gay rights, these are all Republican initiatives which might humorously suggest that the Democrats have not had a new idea since FDR.
1
Seems to me the author simply didn't do the homework.
=====================
He ignored those examples that didn't fit his agenda, like expansion of gun rights that has gone hand-in-hand with the fall in gun crime
=====================
He ignored those examples that didn't fit his agenda, like expansion of gun rights that has gone hand-in-hand with the fall in gun crime
2
Montana has had open primaries and strict campaign laws for a century. Thanks to CU those laws are mostly gone. And now our republicans want a closed primary. Our last two democrat governors maintained a rainy day fund when the republicans wanted to give every cent back to taxpayers. In spite of them and with help from some more moderate republicans we do have a $300 million surplus and a balanced budget that doesn't swing wildly when tax revenues drop or rise. We established a coal tax reserve fund decades ago that is nearly still untouchable. We would have expanded Medicaid to 70,000 citizens but for the republicans. And they'd love to get their hands on the coal tax fund. They kept us from doing another fund with oil and gas.
I actually wonder if closed primaries would diminish the far right republican party in this state. At least eventually. It hasn't worked in other states though. In the meantime we voted in Daines as senator after 1 term in the House and replaced him with Zinke. So it'll be along slog.
I actually wonder if closed primaries would diminish the far right republican party in this state. At least eventually. It hasn't worked in other states though. In the meantime we voted in Daines as senator after 1 term in the House and replaced him with Zinke. So it'll be along slog.
13
As long as most of the state's laboratories are headed by ALEC and the SPN, little innovation will occur. These corporations are fighting for the status quo. Whether it's energy or transportation or consumer goods, the overwhelming influence of these "unionized corporations" not only stifle innovation but use politicians to protect them from competition. See Tesla
45
This otherwise well-argued editorial ignores two-recent titanic political shifts that originated with state-level activism driven by broad nation-wide interests: the legalization of marijuana and recognition of gay marriage. States are perhaps too small and too heterogeneous to effectively test complex policies, but they are perfect for quick, decisive moves towards greater freedom, justice, and equity that the federal government can emulate universally.
68
Along with the two shifts you note are at least two others that are much more constricting of freedom for groups that vastly out number smokers or gays, namely, the voter ID laws and assorted other laws constricting the ability of citizens to vote (based on the myth of "faux voters"), and the constriction of women's rights to proper medical care and/or legal abortions based on the religious beliefs of a particular portion of Christianity and a patriarchal view of women. Ironically, it is the Republicans claiming to free one of government constraints who have imposed laws that make me feel that I can't breath.
2
That states are laboratories for corporations looking for tax giveaways, cheap labor, a free hand to pollute the air and water, and a look-the-other-way attorney general when it comes to worker safety and other abuses. If it's too inconvenient to send the work overseas to a third world country, send it next door to a third world state. Why do the same Americans who blather so loudly about patriotism and greatness of our "nation" believe we are not all entitled to the same benefits and protections under the law? To paraphrase the pudding-headed Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma, states rights is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.
67
Wow, 20 'recommends' so far? The structure of our republic with its federalist form of government is fundamental to the freedoms we maintain. Those powers not enumerated to the federal government are reserved to the states, and to the people. Why? Because In so many things, one size (federal) does not fit all. Also, state politics are closer to home and you can actually have some influence, certainly more than you can at the federal level. Finally, if you don't like the outcome, you can always move to a more attractive state without having to change your citizenship. That's a pretty good arrangement if you ask me.
Wow, 20 'recommends' so far? The structure of our republic with its federalist form of government is fundamental to the freedoms we maintain. Those powers not enumerated to the federal government are reserved to the states, and to the people. Why? Because In so many things, one size (federal) does not fit all. Also, state politics are closer to home and you can actually have some influence, certainly more than you can at the federal level. Finally, if you don't like the outcome, you can always move to a more attractive state without having to change your citizenship. That's a pretty good arrangement if you ask me.
1
"Race to the top" is not a method of to promote "education policy reforms that had been proved to work", rather it is yet another way to muscle local schools into surrendering to the corporate war on the public schools.
5
I'm just dying to have my state follow the Kansas model of tax reform. Or perhaps become a wholly owned subsidiary of big oil. Not very convincing. The states held up are more like a mass suicide pact than "laboratories of democracy'
21
Brandeis said "The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." The progressives in this country bet our freedoms on their ideals.
The ACA is a perfect example.
The ACA is a perfect example.
4
Brandeis had a point.
The greater danger lies in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, using rhetoric that sounds well-meaning but (and I'm sure Brandeis was aware of this) is crafted to hide a very clear understanding of the speakers' personal gain.
We're in a golden era of calculated, intentional fraud and the states are a perfect laboratory for it.
The compromises were made in the ACA courtesy of the pharmaceutical, medical tech and especially the insurance industries' lobbying efforts. It's marvelous that a bill reining in the largest national expense was fashioned and passed. If the congress would do some genuine work refining it, we might have a fairer, more efficient health system - one with a lot fewer parasitic middle-men.
The greater danger lies in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, using rhetoric that sounds well-meaning but (and I'm sure Brandeis was aware of this) is crafted to hide a very clear understanding of the speakers' personal gain.
We're in a golden era of calculated, intentional fraud and the states are a perfect laboratory for it.
The compromises were made in the ACA courtesy of the pharmaceutical, medical tech and especially the insurance industries' lobbying efforts. It's marvelous that a bill reining in the largest national expense was fashioned and passed. If the congress would do some genuine work refining it, we might have a fairer, more efficient health system - one with a lot fewer parasitic middle-men.
4
Beetle, the ACA is the creature of and created by the Right. It was a compromise that Democrats passed because the alternative was no insurance. That is why it is multi-insurance company based (i.e. market based) and not single payer (government centric), which was the desired base of Democrats. Really, the amount of constant misinformation is remarkable. I even have a friend who still believes that Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with Al Qaeda and that's why we invaded Iraq.
5
First of all, while states have developed some new ideas, I don't think history has shown that they are more, or even as, likely to do new things as the federal government. Indeed the ideas that they do develop tend to be in a different category than the federal ones, as is appropriate for the different levels of government. Sure, on occasion they cross over, but states tend to me more provincial and deal with more local issues. Also the recent lack of ideas in states is not due to a lack of bipartisanship; it is due to regressive polices on taxing and investing through spending. While some things don't require much money, a lot of them do, and almost all the latter have been out of the question in the past 7 years, especially with more Republicans in power.
3
There's a misapprehension here. The Republican strategy of sabotaging government at the national level has been complemented by the strategy of seizing control at the state level. Developing and proving new ideas is not the aim here - it's all about imposing the old ones: tax cuts for the rich and service cuts for everyone else, deregulation to the max, privatizing the public good for private gain, and so on.
And while they're doing this, they're also sabotaging Federal efforts to work through the states (refusing to expand medicaid, suing over immigration, etc. etc.) They're furthering their national ambitions by using control of state legislatures to restrict voting and draw voting districts to their advantage. They're emplacing judges whose decisions interpret laws to further their agenda, and continually challenge Federal laws they want to overturn.
There's a critical difference between the parties here. One is trying to provide governance; the other is all about seizing and holding power. It's a civil war without visible armies in the field, but a conflict nonetheless. It has been greatly facilitated by the Democratic abandonment of Howard Dean's 50 state strategy, one reason we have a Congress elected without the input of the two thirds of the voters who stayed home on election day.
And while they're doing this, they're also sabotaging Federal efforts to work through the states (refusing to expand medicaid, suing over immigration, etc. etc.) They're furthering their national ambitions by using control of state legislatures to restrict voting and draw voting districts to their advantage. They're emplacing judges whose decisions interpret laws to further their agenda, and continually challenge Federal laws they want to overturn.
There's a critical difference between the parties here. One is trying to provide governance; the other is all about seizing and holding power. It's a civil war without visible armies in the field, but a conflict nonetheless. It has been greatly facilitated by the Democratic abandonment of Howard Dean's 50 state strategy, one reason we have a Congress elected without the input of the two thirds of the voters who stayed home on election day.
269
"One is trying to provide governance; the other is all about seizing and holding power"
A distinction without a difference
A distinction without a difference
You are correct of course. The author writes " The Obama administration’s Race to the Top program used billions of dollars of prize money to persuade states to adopt several education policy reforms that had been proven to work around the nation", etc., but a better example would have been Obamacare. It was largely based on a Republican model, but rejected sight-unseen by Republicans.
And though the article is right on many points, I think California is doing a terrific job of getting its business straight. Much of what has been done required painful measures. Yet their treatment of immigrants has been humane, their environment record is far better than most other states and their debt is under control. Much more needs to be done, but their leadership should be a road-map for the federal government.
But I doubt any Republican would embrace their policies. You know numbers don't really mater any more. All one need to know is that the recent uptick in the Dow has been hijacked by the Tea Party as the effect of the market knowing a Republican majority is on its way to both chambers of Congress.
And though the article is right on many points, I think California is doing a terrific job of getting its business straight. Much of what has been done required painful measures. Yet their treatment of immigrants has been humane, their environment record is far better than most other states and their debt is under control. Much more needs to be done, but their leadership should be a road-map for the federal government.
But I doubt any Republican would embrace their policies. You know numbers don't really mater any more. All one need to know is that the recent uptick in the Dow has been hijacked by the Tea Party as the effect of the market knowing a Republican majority is on its way to both chambers of Congress.
3
So we have Tea Party amatuers populating State legislatures everywhere without a clue how to legislate or write a bill--their heads stuffed with rotting garbage from the kitchens of Rush and Glenn.
Faced with the task.of actually having to produce something, they avidly seize on the cookie-cutter template bills authored out of state by the ultra right-wing American Legislative Ecchange Council (ALEC) or the corporate overlords like the Koch Brothers who bought their offices.
No wonder there is no originality emanating from the states. Their legislation is as franchised as a Big Mac.
Faced with the task.of actually having to produce something, they avidly seize on the cookie-cutter template bills authored out of state by the ultra right-wing American Legislative Ecchange Council (ALEC) or the corporate overlords like the Koch Brothers who bought their offices.
No wonder there is no originality emanating from the states. Their legislation is as franchised as a Big Mac.
106
Yeahh... We just love those political pros... the power hungry lawyers that robbed SS, and has screwed up America over the past 50 years!
Rah Rah... cheer for the cronies!
Rah Rah... cheer for the cronies!
So we have Tea Party amatuers populating State legislatures everywhere without a clue how to legislate or write a bill--their heads stuffed with rotting garbage from the kitchens of Rush and Glenn.
Faced with the task.of actually having to produce something, they avidly seize on the cookie-cutter template bills authored out of state by the ultra right-wing American Legislative Ecchange Council (ALEC) or the corporate overlords like the Koch Brothers who bought their offices.
No wonder there is no originality emanating from the states. Their legislation is as franchised as a Big Mac.
=======================
Interesting point of view.
So how do you account for the fact that the "free" junior college program that Obama has proposed is based on a program from Tennessee? You know, one of those states where Republicans control the governorship and both houses of the legislature.
Faced with the task.of actually having to produce something, they avidly seize on the cookie-cutter template bills authored out of state by the ultra right-wing American Legislative Ecchange Council (ALEC) or the corporate overlords like the Koch Brothers who bought their offices.
No wonder there is no originality emanating from the states. Their legislation is as franchised as a Big Mac.
=======================
Interesting point of view.
So how do you account for the fact that the "free" junior college program that Obama has proposed is based on a program from Tennessee? You know, one of those states where Republicans control the governorship and both houses of the legislature.
Did you look at New Hampshire? Gov. Hassan has brought us innovative education, energy, and Veterans' care policies. The latter is already being applied in other states.
6
Do not expect facts or reality from the Tenured Class...
Their basic jobs depend on Collectivist governance.
Their basic jobs depend on Collectivist governance.
It's interesting that so many people can talk about state government without actually having experienced it. I have.
I was in a unique position in my career where I worked with nearly every state in the U.S. on multiple occasions over many years, at all levels, from the Governors' offices on down to local levels. I also worked directly in a high-level position in state government in one state.
I can say categorically that states have the most inept, bumbling "old-boy" networks of biased, uninformed legislators and staff by far. If everyone really knew how inept most state legislators really are, there would be a revolution.
Unfortunately, most citizens think state government is "good" and believe the many years of right-wing propaganda that federal government is "bad". So they pay no attention to what really goes on in state government and then are surprised when the work of the legislators goes sour. Like in Kansas.
I was in a unique position in my career where I worked with nearly every state in the U.S. on multiple occasions over many years, at all levels, from the Governors' offices on down to local levels. I also worked directly in a high-level position in state government in one state.
I can say categorically that states have the most inept, bumbling "old-boy" networks of biased, uninformed legislators and staff by far. If everyone really knew how inept most state legislators really are, there would be a revolution.
Unfortunately, most citizens think state government is "good" and believe the many years of right-wing propaganda that federal government is "bad". So they pay no attention to what really goes on in state government and then are surprised when the work of the legislators goes sour. Like in Kansas.
137
" .. I can say categorically that states have the most inept, bumbling "old-boy" networks of biased, uninformed legislators and staff by far .."
Average age in U.S. Senate: 71.
V.A. hospitals -- not inept? Only to the cognitively blind.
Average age in U.S. Senate: 71.
V.A. hospitals -- not inept? Only to the cognitively blind.
5
As someone who spent thirty years in state government, there is much that I can agree with here. However, thoughtful reform can still emerge while the bumblers are distracted or disinterested. It often starts with an independent staff initiative that responds to a community or interest and that gains a champion at some point in the political mix. Give them credit for the idea and the often unguarded doors open wide to reform. But, it starts with the courage to create something. If you simply draft an idea and have the temerity to circulate it, it takes on a life of its own forcing others to respond. Want change? Create it.
8
What about the cronyism on the Federal level?
Bigger dollars... more power... more corruption.
Bigger dollars... more power... more corruption.
Chatterji is correct that state programs cannot be "scaled" without regard for local conditions. But astute federalists have recognized this for some 40 years by providing federal support for state and local block grant programs, which allow multiple solutions to flourish. There is a long-standing consensus that one size does not fit all, and that it is prudent to test and utilize.multiple policy approaches-- provided that minimum requirements are set for desired performance outcomes.
A greater enemy to the state "laboratory of democracy" ideal is hostility to government spending at the federal and state levels. This hostility is constraining government effectiveness even as federal and state budgets recover.
A greater enemy to the state "laboratory of democracy" ideal is hostility to government spending at the federal and state levels. This hostility is constraining government effectiveness even as federal and state budgets recover.
68
I agree with VCashti4's observation that calling Kansas Governor Brownback's tax cuts "reform" fails to properly describe the disastrous effect slashing taxes had on that state's budget. That said, it is certainly a lesson in the actual effect of tax cuts during a recession: these cuts cause great damage and fail to generate jobs.
We're seeing similar experiments run across the country - gutting state oversight of polluting industries resulting in contaminated drinking water in West Virginia and North Carolina, for example. Thanks to the lifting on campaign donation limits, however, these are not experiments in democracy - they are experiments in oligarchy.
We're seeing similar experiments run across the country - gutting state oversight of polluting industries resulting in contaminated drinking water in West Virginia and North Carolina, for example. Thanks to the lifting on campaign donation limits, however, these are not experiments in democracy - they are experiments in oligarchy.
187
John M., We ain't seen nothin' yet. . . . Wait till you see what the Republican dominated Congress produces! The nation they want is an ugly, voracious organized oligarchy. The nation won't come out ahead unless and until the gerrymandered election districts are eliminated so that the balance of Democrats and Republicans is more equal in the Congressional districts. That alone might produce a contest of ideas. But don't hold your breath.
2
"The power of state policy innovations is that they traditionally had bipartisan fingerprints"
No. The power of state policy is it gave the single party control the opportunity to show it could do what it promised.
The problem today is that none of the states are showing they can do what is wanted, and none of their governments seem interested in trying, not bipartisan, and not partisan.
Our politics are now so corrupt that the states no longer function to govern for our interests. They have been bought and paid for, and are just another layer of oligarchy owning control.
No. The power of state policy is it gave the single party control the opportunity to show it could do what it promised.
The problem today is that none of the states are showing they can do what is wanted, and none of their governments seem interested in trying, not bipartisan, and not partisan.
Our politics are now so corrupt that the states no longer function to govern for our interests. They have been bought and paid for, and are just another layer of oligarchy owning control.
149
Or more a reaction to 21,000,000 unemployed or under-employed and 47,000,000 on food stamps. While BHO hands out 7,000,000 work permits to his "undocumented."
3
I'm glad that Aaron Chatterji
Didn't laud states for Voter ID,
Brownback's "tax reforms"
Fostered fiscal storms,
He praises wrongs implicitly!
Didn't laud states for Voter ID,
Brownback's "tax reforms"
Fostered fiscal storms,
He praises wrongs implicitly!
52
As a Kansan, I'm more than a little dismayed that the author would refer to Gov. Sam Brownback's disastrous tax cuts for the rich as "tax reforms". Aspiring to be Mississippi is not "reform". Maybe the author is really regretting the failure of conservative/libertarian policies at the state level.
238
I agree and find it strange that the author was a part of the Obama White House. REH
4
I don't really think the author was lauding those failed policies, Vashti4, he just used unfortunate descriptives to name them. He was, instead, lamenting the failure of the "state incubator" as a birth place for innovation. Just my opinion, of course.
4
Far from being laboratories of democracy, they have been turned into laboratories for ALEC. The irony is that while claiming to be for States Rights, these ALEChemists are busy shaping the states to conform to a common template according to their specifications.
246
A multi-state laboratory of plutocracy. If it goes federal game over.
8
My thoughts too.
Unfortunately, far too many state politicians are lazy, right wing simpletons who are all to eager to collect graft and have the ALEC template used to push through legislation, favoring those paying the graft.
They don't care a whit about the average voter and the lack of innovative ideas that favor such voters, is therefore understandable.
Unfortunately, far too many state politicians are lazy, right wing simpletons who are all to eager to collect graft and have the ALEC template used to push through legislation, favoring those paying the graft.
They don't care a whit about the average voter and the lack of innovative ideas that favor such voters, is therefore understandable.
24
ALEC's opponents are appointed by God to lecture the working class about what to do and say?
Of course. Not.
The writer's team spent ~$500 million on advertising for the Nov. 4th, 2014 election.
How did that turn out, that real-world research on "Citizens United?"
Of course. Not.
The writer's team spent ~$500 million on advertising for the Nov. 4th, 2014 election.
How did that turn out, that real-world research on "Citizens United?"