After all, state and local governments already handle drivers’ licenses, car inspections, construction permits and the public schools – all fabled sources of citizen frustration. As for bloated bureaucracy, the states increasingly make Washington look trim. In 1980 the federal government had 2.8 million full-time employees; by 1993 that had grown only marginally, to 2.9 million. The states, meanwhile, had 3.6 million full-time employees in 1980; by 1993 that had ballooned to 4.5 million. What do these proliferating state bureaucracies do? Often the same thing as the federal ones. For example, all states now have their own environmental protection agencies, each busily composing a slightly different set of rules.
State capitals can be just as corrupt as Washington. Recently, 14 Kentucky state legislators were convicted of taking cash payments to fix a racetrack scheme; five California lawmakers were jailed for bribery, one after he fled to Costa Rica. State-level special-interest lobbyists often have far more suspect connections than those in Washington, simply because the spotlight is less bright. And just because state officials are geographically closer to constituents does not mean they are less arrogant. A Maryland commission charged with distributing funds for “empowerment” – that is, giving power to the people – recently announced it would hold its meetings in secret.
Governors often shake their heads over the federal government’s fiscal incompetence while failing to mention one of the secrets to balancing state budgets: 21.4 percent of state revenues come from federal grants. If Washington ended such subsidies, state budgets would go seriously out of whack and the federal deficit would be more than halved in a single stroke. Governors wouldn’t necessarily like the consequences. When the Reagan administration proposed ending federal gasoline taxes and giving states the option of raising them, along with the responsibility for highway maintenance, governors balked because they didn’t want to be blamed for more taxes or repair screw-ups.
States do enact some innovative programs. Wisconsin’s experiment in two-years-and-out welfare holds promise, and New Jersey has a strong record of cleaning up toxic wastes. Hawaii has what is, in effect, America’s only universal-health-care system. But it hardly qualifies as less government.
And consider welfare and Medicaid, two programs widely considered among the worst in the United States: they are administered by the states, using 50 different sets of rules. Two similar programs that are expensive but otherwise run smoothly – social security and Medicare – are administered by Washington, using uniform national standards. The feds don’t always work so efficiently – but it’s sometimes better than 50 alternatives.
