California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently tried to implement some new plans that would cut the medicare designated to elder care workers by a decent amount while thus lowering taxes by 5%. However federal courts did not allow this act go through.
Now I have to admit, I have very mixed feelings on this particular decision. Though I agree ultimately with the decision the courts made, I don’t necessarily agree with the limiting of a states power to such an extent.
As I have made clear in a few of my earlier posts, I am all for government regulating of the basic necessities being food, shelter, and healthcare. However at the same time, I believe wholeheartedly that a state should have the right to make its own set of laws, which puts me at a bit of an inpass. It raises the question as to, how much power should the state have compared to the power of the federal government?
I believe in an ideal society, the federal laws should hold true above all else, however they should be very limited on the amount of laws they are able to put forth. Essentially, there laws should only deal with basic human rights such as, don’t kill someone. Don’t torture anyone. Nobody is allowed to force anybody to stay anywhere or to put anyone under any type of enslavement. Then go into details about the definitions of each of these words to make sure nobody finds loopholes. Also, this is where trade and exchange laws should be set up.
Then I feel each state should be in charge of the more general laws, while not being able to cross break the main rules the federal laws set up. They are granted a little more room on laws in which some opinion is allowed, though still keeping the rules fairly general. Things like which substances are allowed, and things like that.
However the most freedom should go to the individual communities themselves. This is where you get into the most nit-picky of laws, as long as they do not oppose the state or fed.
In many ways it seems like this is what we attempted to do in this country, except community laws hold very little, and the division of power is very staggered and unsure.
So getting back to the article Do I believe the state should be able to control budgeting on healthcare? I am going to have to say yes. I feel in this way, if each state is controlling its own budgeting, it would be like running a whole bunch of experiments to see which budget system works most efficiently. Each state could them mimic the most efficiently running budget system, and there we go. It’s sometimes impossible to know what will work best before trying it. This is why experiments exist.