Question

fter reading the section on "Intergovernmental Relationships" and the "Mandate Monitor" from the National Conference of State Legislatures, what is your opinion on unfunded mandates? Should the federal government have the power to require the states to do something, while not providing funding?

support would be great too thank you soo much

Answer 1

An unfunded requirement is when another agency is mandated by a new piece of federal legislation to perform functions for which it has no funds. This is often extended by Congress for state, regional, and tribal governments. Unfunded mandates may also impact individuals and organizations in the private sector.

Previously, Congress determined that state funding was available to meet federal requirements. But when the funding began to dry up, the additional burden began to resent by states. The states argued that unfunded mandates were in violation of American conventional cooperation-based federalism. They are forced to implement federal orders instead.

This imposes an unfunded mandate on companies if Congress raises the U.S. minimum wage. Through paying higher wages out of their wallets, they must comply with the law. The average cost of the minimum wage increase in 1996 is $4 million per country. Business lobbying against this unfunded mandate has remained unchanged since 2009 with the minimum wage. The policy that is not enforced is to reduce federal funding to implement Food Stamps or other welfare programs. The price of administering food stamps in 1998 contributed $5 million to government budgets.

The degree of flexibility of the agency in administering the grant program varies depending on the type of grant program and the provisions of the authorizing statute. Depending on a legislative formula, department discretion, or some combination of the two, federal grant funds are distributed to beneficiaries. In some cases, Congress may develop a specific statutory formula to distribute federal funds to eligible recipients of grants. In other situations, Congress may require federal agencies to exercise their discretion for awarding grant funds to affirmatively applying qualifying entities; such grants are often referred to as "competitive grants."

The grievances are responded to by Congress. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act was passed on March 15, 1995. The Act requires the Office of the Congressional Budget to recognize and forecast any unfunded mandates costs. It covers legislative bills and regulations provided by federal agencies. The CBO has to evaluate all proposals that would cost more than $50 million to the state, court, and local governments. The limit for private-sector bills was $100 million. The rates are adjusted for inflation every year. The limit for 2016 was $77 million for intergovernmental mandates and $154 million for mandates from the private sector.

Any committee of the House and the Senate that introduces these bills should demonstrate where the funding comes from. If they don't, the bill will be killed if it is not kept alive by a majority vote.