“Federalism. I believe Fred thought it wasn’t the fedgov’s role to mandate to the states on this matter.”
Huh? If it was coming before the US Congress for a vote, it’s a safe bet that it was FEDERAL, not state, benefits that were being discussed.
Really? And all those Federal laws mandating how States must spend education dollars, or withholding Highway money if the State fails to adopt a 21 year old drinking age, are legitimately Federal?
Man, have you been asleep for the last seventy years or so? The feds ROUTINELY dictate state and local matters to the states, the 10th Amendment be damned. Given that the bill dealt with emergency medical care and public education, those are NOT federal matters - or at least should not be.
Not necessarily. Much of the business of the Federal Govt. has been creeping into the States over the last 40 years, and this is one of the things that Fred is going to try to change. The Federal Govt should NOT be involved in how states run their own affairs, unless is it something that is directly related to the Govt. according to the Constitution.
It could very well be that the vote mentioned in this story was that kind of issue. Taking a vote out of context can give it an entirely new and wrong meaning.