Muscatine

I didn't say all those were a federal responsibility.   Most are done more efficiently on a nation-wide basis, but fine, have the states do them. 

It'll cost more and it still requires tax revenue.

In her small mind, the Mal sees only tax increases as the solution.  She cannot comprehend that there is enough waste, welfare, and  dollars flushed on upkeep of illegals to bridge the debt gap.  She wants to pay more, and because she won't do her homework, calls people "deadbeats" when they ask for accountablilty.  Eliminating wasteful spending isn't even on her radar screen.  It is this total lack of understanding that will lead to huge conservative strides forward in the next election. 

  Most are done more efficiently on a nation-wide basis, but fine, have the states do them.

It'll cost more and it still requires tax revenue.

It has not been shown that "many" are done more efficiently on a nationwide basis.  Many can and should be done by the states according to our national constitution.  And I like the idea of letting the states decide whether they really need to be done or not.  If the states decide that they are not cost effective, it will save us a lot.

We used to get along just fine with a lot less federal interference.

The feds should be only concerned with protecting the citizens of this country and enemies foreign and domestic.  They also have some responsibility in the area of coordinating some of the infrastructure.  They also are responsible for treating with foreign entities.

But the states can and should handle most of the rest.  That was the intent of the founding fathers.   The constitution was written to protect the individual citizens and the states from a centralized government overstepping it's authorized powers.

The sentence starting the 4th paragraph should read, "The feds should be only concerned with protecting the citizens of this country from enemies foreign and domestic......"