Once upon a time the U.S. Supreme Court deferred to Congress to balance the powers of federal and state governments. Then along came Chief Justice William Reinquist who has leaned on the 10th Amendment to steadily steer the court toward states’ rights.

The sitting Supreme Court holds states’ powers in high esteem, bowing deeply to constitutional guarantees of self-government. The legislative arm of federal government isn’t so inclined, conceding to states’ rights when it must, but also imposing great burdens on states and threatening penalties if they don’t comply.

This is especially irritating when it comes to schools.

The U.S. Constitution requires the federal government to raise and support armies, to establish post offices, to punish felons and to coin money. It does not even mention public education. The guarantee of a public education falls to individual states.

It stands to reason, then, that states ought to have final say in regulating and operating schools, trumping mandates by the federal government.

That is, unfortunately, not true.

Last week, Rep. Michael Michaud announced that he would oppose reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities Act, not because he believes the disabled don’t deserve protection, but because he believes the federal legislation imposes undue hardship on states through unfunded mandates.

When IDEA was enacted three decades ago, Congress intended that federal government would pay 40 percent of all special education costs. In Maine, during this current school year, the federal government is paying just 13.35 percent. The average reimbursement is about 18 percent nationally.

The federal government mandates special education, doesn’t pay its share of the cost and threatens punishment for districts that do not conform.

The same is true with the new and onerous No Child Left Behind Act.

Schools across this country are scrambling to meet new federal regulations to avoid being identified as failing schools, which could lead to automatic funding cuts. This is particularly troublesome in Maine because our learning standards are already demonstrably tougher than those imposed by the feds, and yet we will not be excused from the federal regs because Education Secretary Rod Paige doesn’t want to set a precedent for underachieving states to slide.

If the central government refuses to evaluate the educational needs and successes of individual states when granting or withholding funding, it could be grounds to argue that government is interfering with states’ rights.

Michaud’s frustration of federally imposed – but unfunded – mandates is shared by taxpayers and educators. The cries of complaint have been steady over at least the past decade and Congress has evidently not heard because it continues to pile on the mandates.

While we appreciate Michaud’s stand against unfunded mandates, bucking a Congress that has repeatedly ignored the tacit unfairness of these impositions is not the solution. Perhaps Michaud’s energy would be better served to bring this matter to a Supreme Court that holds the 10th Amendment in high regard.


[email protected]