{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}


DDI09-BQ-Unfunded-Mandates - Dartmouth 2K9 1 CP Text States...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
e790f17f96d970b19280591c013c579b04c347e0.doc Dartmouth 2K9 1 CP Text: States hate unfunded mandates Paul Posner , George Mason U, “The politics of unfunded mandates” ' 98 (p. 78, http://books.google.com/books? hl=en&lr=&id=q7A630A-ss8C&oi=fnd&pg=PR13&dq=Posner,+Paul+L.+The+Politics+of+Unfunded+Mandates: +Whither+Federalism%3F+Washington,+DC:+Georgetown+University+Press,+1998.&ots=irUGD2Aj4E&sig=WxJm2CverzZZ- U_x4KJBHcvMGrQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false) The literature on interest groups suggests that state and local governments would be expected to intensely oppose the imposition of mandates. As Jeffrey Berry reports, the most common reason cited from organizing business interest groups is opposition to impending or actual federal regulation. David Vogel notes that the expanded advocacy of business interests in the late 1970s was due to the costs imposed by environmental programs enacted earlier that decade. More broadly, traditional interest group theory suggests that formal groups arise due to disturbances in their socioeconomic environment; in fact, the rate of interest group formation could serve as an index of the stability of a society. If interest groups did not already exist, in this view, the recent outpouring of mandates would guarantee the formation of state and local lobbies . <INSERT SCENARIO> Last printed 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
e790f17f96d970b19280591c013c579b04c347e0.doc Dartmouth 2K9 2 States Hate Unfunded Mandates States empirically hate unfunded mandates – REAL ID proves Ben Arnoldy , CSM reporter, '08 (“States fight as REAL ID deadline nears”, 3-25-08, http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0331/p03s03-uspo.html?page=1) Frustrated by unfunded federal mandates, a number of states are revolting . The latest case in point: stiff resistance to REAL ID, a controversial post-9/11 law that aims to make driver's licenses more secure. The Department of Homeland Security set Monday as the deadline for states to get an extension for implementing REAL ID . Miss this deadline, DHS warned resistant states, and come May, your residents won't be allowed to board planes with their current driver's licenses. Montana is one state that's been opposed to the DHS requirements. Rather than request an extension, it sent DHS a letter explaining what it's already doing to strengthen licenses. Still, DHS responded on March 21 by granting an extension. New Hampshire, another REAL ID holdout, took a similar path with DHS and also got an unasked-for extension last week. Beyond REAL ID, a series of federal moves in recent years have stepped on states' toes, including the No Child Left Behind Act and federal tort reforms, says David Davenport, professor of public policy at Pepperdine University in California. "The pendulum is swinging a little bit back towards states' rights now, and that's one context in which to see this REAL ID battle," he says. It's been a long time since states have expressed the levels of exasperation seen with REAL ID and No Child Left Behind, adds Carl Tubbesing, deputy executive director of the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), which has objected to REAL ID. "No
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 11

DDI09-BQ-Unfunded-Mandates - Dartmouth 2K9 1 CP Text States...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online