Federalism is one of the key bulwarks that have defended America from the totalitarianism we now feel tightening around our necks. So it’s no surprise that the snooty statists at The New Yorker would denounce it:

If you came up with a list of obstacles to economic recovery in this country, it would include all the usual suspects — our still weak banking system, falling house prices, overindebted consumers, cautious companies. But here are fifty culprits you might not have thought of: the states. Federalism, often described as one of the great strengths of the American system, has become a serious impediment to reversing the downturn.

States allegedly prevent the beloved (by moonbats) federal government from spending stimulus money efficiently, i.e., in cities, where the moonbats tend to live. Worse yet, they prevent us from getting our power from windmills:

Even more important, federalism is getting in the way of the creation of a “smart” American power grid. This would involve turning the current hodgepodge of regional and state grids into a genuinely national grid, which would detect and respond to problems as they happen, giving users more information about and control over their electricity use, and so on. It could also dramatically reduce our dependence on oil. Wind power could eventually produce as much as twenty per cent of the energy that America consumes. The problem is that the places where most of that wind power can be generated tend to be a long way from the places where most of that power would be consumed. A new grid would enable us to get the power to where it’s needed. But since nobody likes power lines running through his property, building the grid would require overriding or placating the states — and the prospects of that aren’t great.

Our government is controlled by environmental extremists who won’t let us build a nuclear plant or oil refinery, or for the most part even drill our own oil. But if we don’t build a new national power grid, it could only be because of that pesky Constitution.

The piece ends on an ominous note:

It’s a global economy. It would be helpful to have a genuinely national government.

If it’s a global economy, why settle for an even more heavy-handed national government? Think how efficient our windmills would be under a one-world left-wing dictatorship.

An honest liberal would answer: One step at a time.

On a tip from Rob Banks. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

0

Comments are closed.