if the federal government decided that rather than passing laws and making states carry them out it would simply give the states responsibility for a major social program like welfare?
Do you think that it would create a lot of new jobs for the state, but how would they afford to pay all these people? Caotic?!
2007-09-21 08:23:37 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
The federal government should just quit passing unfunded mandates of any kind onto the states.
We don't need more social programs or more government employees.
2007-09-21 08:28:04 · answer #1 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since the federal government pays half the cost of welfare, if it was "given" to the state it would simply collapse. States don't have enough money to support it by themselves. So basically you would have a horribly underfunded program that wouldn't work, and people would be laid off due to lack of funds. Or a large amount of taxes would have to be created to fund the money that the federal government gives to the states now.
2007-09-21 08:36:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Federal government does not "just craete laws". Federal laws are enforced by the federal government. State laws are passed by and enforced by state governments. Local laws are passed by and enforced by local governments. Welfare in most of the fifty states is governend by and paid for by the states.
2007-09-21 08:30:57 · answer #3 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋