Interesting.

States are blackmailed into changing their laws to get federal funding so Congress can buy a national law states would otherwise not pass. But.... What is there to stop a state from changing the law back after receiving the federal funding? Wonder if they'll change the tobacco age back after getting the covid funds?

https://www.wistv.com/2021/11/10/state-representative-pre-files-bill-lower-sc-drinking-age-18/

State representative pre-files bill to lower S.C. drinking age to 18

“This is a personal freedom issue. If you are old enough to fight for our country, if you’re old enough to vote, if you’re old enough to sign on for thousands of dollars of student loans for a college education, then you are old enough to have a drink,” Rutherford said.

Tiggity®

Oculus Spirit [97656]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 64802

Joined: 7/13/02

The way we got here was a 1980's highway appropriations bill

Nov 11, 2021, 7:49 AM

in Congress. A "proviso" attached to the bill said that if a state did not have a 21yo drinking age, they would get no funding. So all states changed their laws, and shazam, you get a nationwide "federal" 21yo drinking age. They recently did the same thing with tobacco with the first covid bill Trump signed. Same means used to get a nationwide 55mph speed limit. So SC changed our state laws to get the federal cheese each and every time. BAD practice.

It's really no different that putting a proviso in the budget denying state funding to any school who enacts a mask requirement. Laws should be passed based on a vote on the issue, not enacted through financial persuasion. Lord knows we have enough money to enact some BAD and stupid laws.

It doesn't matter if the federal government uses money to force a federal law that would otherwise not pass a normal vote, or a state passing a state law that would never survive a vote on its own. Same difference. Bad practice.

But the article is interesting because once the money is distributed, what's to stop a state from going back to the prior law they had? Maybe keep a running list of provisions in prior laws and attach that as an addendum to all new spending bills, reminding the state that if it reverts any law they changed previously for funding, they don't get whatever the current funding may be. It could end up being a VERY LONG list. If Governor Mack Master wants the billions in federal funds so he can do his highway spending/infrastructure speaking tour, he will have to keep a 21yo drinking age, a 21yo tobacco age, a 55mph speed limit, a seat belt law, etc.

Just found the proposition interesting. I promise this is not how our founding fathers envisioned federal spending and bills out of Congress.