Federalism and Frustrations

I spent the majority of today captivated by the National Governor's Association centennial meeting, broadcast on CSPAN.  Along with permanently disqualifying my application into the cool kids club, I found myself trying to converse with the state executives who were comfortably seated in the Kimmel Center in Philadelphia.  The lively discussion in the morning session (because YES I watched both Morning and Afternoon sessions, as well as, the keynote speech by President Clinton) centered upon federalism and the rights and roles of states in the 'laboratory of leadership'.  

Naturally, the governors were quick to express their frustration at the lack of support for states rights by the Bush administration and the lassitude of Congress; a politician's best defense is offense.   Yet, the sense of urgency among the group was palpable.  The leaders, both past and present, know that states need to be drivers in the policies and practices set in place to have in the major issues of today (most notably energy, education and health care); disdain for the federal imposition and vagueness inherent in NCLB was abundant.  It is clear that issues pertaining to national defense are best handled by the federal government- and it's not difficult to argue that a coherent and fluid energy policy is a matter of national defense.  Yet, it is less difficult to standardize best practices and marketize procedures for a systems/product based issue than one that deals in people, such as health care and education.  Both human issues are also matters of national defense; defense of our culture, our economy, our innovative abilities, our hearts (literally and figuratively).  The natural struggle that results is a tension between the federal government's obligation as public steward to protect the national defense, the states' desire to direct and control the lives of their youth, the cultural restrictions and expectations of each individual community and, perhaps most important but least easy to address, the necessity of familial engagement in each educational/health care choice made.   In other words, it is a Hot Mess.  

The governors all want to do the right thing, they really do.  Yet the complexity of the issues and the partisan pressures to turn them into a black/white issue leads to a lot of well-meaning leaders seeking a blanket solution.  And in this quest to solve the problems becomes circular; the kids and the sick continually get left behind.