Returning power to the states is a universally popular political applause line these days. The U.S. House has passed-and the Senate is now considering-“block grants” that would let states spend a limited pool of federal welfare money however they want. Relishing the moment, capitals are brandishing the 10th Amendment, which empowers states to do what’s not expressly delegated to the Feds. For ruggedly independent legislatures like Arizona’s, that means doing less.
These anti-Feds adroitly package their ideology in down-to-earth terms. Last week Arizona exempted itself from the federal ban on manufacturing Freon and other chlorofluorocarbons, even though federal courts are almost certain to declare the state’s action unconstitutional. But Freon is what makes air conditioners blow cold air-the key to daily life in an and region. “We aren’t exactly thrilled with the federal government on Freon,” says GOP Gov. Fife Symington. “This is just a great political issue for us.” Symington’s mind is on sun-belt politics: a supporter of Sen. Phil Gramm, Symington moved Arizona’s primary up to Feb. 27, which may give Gramm, who is popular here, a boost.
But what’s happening isn’t just about campaigns. The legislature passed a bill enabling businesses to avoid prosecution if they voluntarily report environmental violations to state regulators. Critics call it the “polluter-protection act.” At a time when federal regulations are being pared down, states are increasingly free to pass such industry-friendly laws. The result could be a race for the bottom-the lowest taxes and fewest regulations to attract businesses and residents. Such a race could have clear losers. Arizona has a higher percentage of its people in poverty than 31 other states. Yet its welfare benefits trail the national average. And although the state depends on U.S.-built water projects and social-security receiving retirees, getting back $1.20 for every dollar it sends to Washington, there’s no sign Arizona, currently enjoying good economic times, will get more generous. This year, conservatives killed a plan to bring 150,000 of the working poor into the state’s health plan for the disadvantaged. The legislature eliminated $1 million from the Women, Infants and Children nutrition program-money that bought food for 10,000 extra people each month. And the Department of Health and Human Services just approved the state’s tough welfare-reform plan.
States’-rights boosters believe that if only Washington would get out of the way, all would be well. Experience suggests, though, that states are not notably better than the Feds at running things. Take Arizona’s major welfare agency For 20 years its books were so badly kept that auditors couldn’t track its $2.5 billion annual budget. And while “Az-Scam”-the sting in which lawmakers were videotaped accepting bribes-has faded, charges of corruption are not unknown. Although one probe by local prosecutors found no wrongdoing, the state attorney general is investigating whether one of Symington’s former top aides improperly awarded $4.5 million in state contracts.
A larger question is whether Arizona can afford getting Washington off its back. just as the flow of federal dollars is slowing, state tax rates are dropping (Arizona, like New Jersey, has passed millions of dollars in income-tax cuts). So the next time the economy falters, there may be less money to pay for the social services that are always in greater demand in tough times. Symington senses trouble. How much federal money a state gets could be based on static population figures; Arizona’s population is growing at twice the national rate. The governor’s solution? A trip to Washington to lobby for favorable treatment. Rugged self-reliance, it seems, has its limits.
