States cp ddi 2012
Perm is normal means – federal government gives funding to the states that then individually allocate funds and implement projects
Download 0.94 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Perm is normal means – feds give funding for states to use
- Perm: do both with income taxation
- States and the federal government should do transportation infrastructure jointly
Perm is normal means – federal government gives funding to the states that then individually allocate funds and implement projectsRobert J. Dilger, Director of West Virginia University’s Institute for Public Affairs and Professor in the Eberly College of Arts and Science’s Department of Political Science, 1998, Publius (1998) 28 (1): pg. 53-54, ‘TEA-21: Transportation Policy, Pork Barrel Politics, and American Federalism’, Oxford Journals, TB Two important lessons can be derived from the examination of ISTEA and its reauthorization process. First, although federal transportation funding patterns continued relatively unchanged under ISTEA, with highway construction and repair remaining the program's dominant focus, ISTEA did decentralize transportation policy, changing its programmatic focus from national-state to state-local. Moreover, although proposals to further decentralize transportation policy garner little support in Congress, TEA-21 retained ISTEA's basic features and will continue the decentralization that it brought about. Despite the 1,850 congressionally mandated "demonstration" projects, states will continue to dominate the project selection under TEA-21, and MPOs will continue to see their influence in project selection increase, especially MPOs representing areas widi populations exceeding 200,000. Also, TEA-21 should provide local officials in rural areas a limited, but increased, role in selecting projects in their areas. Perm is normal means – feds give funding for states to useRoss. R. Fulton, Partner at Rayburn Cooper & Durham, P.A. Attorneys at Law, 4/26/2007, “Our Federal System”: States’ Susceptibility to Challenge When Applying Federal Affirmative Action Law, University of Chicago Law Review, http://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/lawreview.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/74.2/74_2_Fulton.pdf, TB In the 1980s and ’90s, Congress passed a series of highway laws providing states with federal funds to augment state highway projects—but with “strings attached.”1Under these laws, states only receive federal funds if they agree to implement congressionally designed affirmative action programs on state highway projects using federal funds.2 These laws accomplish Congress’s goal of promoting minority participation in state highway projects but leave states the responsibility of enacting and implementing the specific affirmative action programs.3 Congress’s authority to place conditions on federal funds stems from its constitutionally based Spending Power.4 Normally, Congress passes laws that are directly implemented by the federal government. By contrast, the Spending Power allows Congress to achieve its policy goals indirectly, using federal funds to incentivize state action. Permutation Perm: do both with income taxationMusgrave 97 Richard A. Musgrave, formerly H.H. Burbank Professor of Political Economy, Emeritus, Harvard University and formerly Adjunct Professor of Economics, University of California, Santa Cruz, “Devolution, Grants, and Fiscal Competition,” American Economic Association, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 65-72, Autumn 1997, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138462 As an alternative to competition, the relationship among fiscal jurisdic-tions may be seen in terms of cooperation and coordination. Tax coordination in a federal system need not involve a sharp division of tax bases by levels of government. Income taxation, as in the United States, may apply at both the federal and state levels and in some countries is administered in joint form. With progressive taxation effective at only the central level, the retail sales tax supplemented by low-rate income taxation is left to the states. The property tax, when used to finance specific local outlays, retains a component of benefit taxation and as such is suitable for the local level. All in all, the existing dis-tribution of tax bases among our levels of government makes fairly good sense. Nevertheless, cooperation between jurisdictions is required. The retail sales tax calls for cooperation to protect revenues against mail and cross-border shopping. Personal income taxation calls for cooperation to enable jurisdictions to reach the total income of their residents, including that earned outside their borders, a task facilitated by the availability of federal returns to state tax authorities. More complex needs for coordination arise under the corporation income tax. For corporations operating within a number of states, the source of income has to be assigned among jurisdictions and with it the division of tax base. Further problems arise in the tax treatment of related enterprises, and so forth. The need for tax coordination is magnified at the international level, and especially so in a world of growing economic integration. As the mobility of capital and other resources becomes more global, national governments become more local in nature. Coordination between national governments then becomes essential, lest the compounded powers of devolution, competition and globalization destroy the integrity of fiscal systems. Techniques of coordination can be devised, solutions which permit coexistence and do so without forcing uniformity or retreat from equitable taxation (P. Musgrave, 1991). What might be harmful collusion in the market for products can become constructive cooperation in the interjurisdictional fiscal setting. What is bad for the private goose may, if properly applied, prove good for the public gander. States and the federal government should do transportation infrastructure jointlyNCSL 11 [National Conference of State Legislatures, 2011, “Surface Transportation Federalism”, http://www.ncsl.org/documents/transportation/SurfTransFederalism.pdf] aw The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) calls on Congress to work closely with states to develop a shared, long-term vision for financing and funding surface transportation systems that will enhance the nation’s prosperity and the quality of life of all Americans. The federal government plays a vital role in supporting a national surface transportation system that meets national defense needs, addresses fairly and equally the mobility needs of all Americans and facilitates interstate commerce. NCSL supports the continuation and preservation of a federal-aid surface transportation program. The federal program should direct spending to national priorities while allowing for state and insular area flexibility in local and regional variations. It is also essential that the federal-aid surface transportation program incorporate requirements and foster goals of other national policies that impact transportation decision-making. Recent federal reauthorizations have recognized the unique contributions of each transportation mode to the productivity of the states and the nation, and to the ability of this nation to compete globally in the emerging and existing international economies. These laws contemplate an integrated transportation system for the movement of both goods and people, with increased emphasis on adopting technologies that improve productivity. NCSL urges Congress to increase funding for federal-aid surface transportation programs and provide states enhanced programming flexibility and increased responsibility for meeting a multitude of national goals. The ability of states to maintain flexibility in decision making and comply with environmental and other mandates is dependent upon regulatory flexibility as well as adequate and reliable funding. Permutation Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.94 Mb. Share with your friends:
|