Governor Michael O. Leavitt

During the summer of my 16th birthday, it was my job to change the sprinklers on my grandfather's dusty hay fields morning and night. It was a hard and tedious job. First, you turned the water off at the head of a long line of pipe with sprinkler heads set every 16 feet. Then, one at a time, you moved the 16-foot lengths of aluminum pipe 30 or 40 feet forward and reconnected them starting at the main water line. Once the last pipe was reassembled, it was a long walk back to the top of the field to turn on the water. The water would rush into the pipe, hissing as it pressurized each sprinkler head, until the water burst onto the dry field.

One morning, the line was reassembled, the valve turned on, but there was no pressure. I looked down the long lane running alongside the field toward the system's main valve, some two miles away. Usually, dozens of sprinkler systems on both sides of the lane would be watering fields. They had no pressure either.

As I looked further down the lane, the problem became evident. A 100 foot geyser was shooting into the air --visible all over the valley. A problem had occurred at the main valve.

I had lots of sprinklers to change that day, but I knew until the main system was fixed I could not get water to the field. I got in the truck and drove down the lane to the geyser.

A dozen farmers participated in that sprinkler system. The malfunction affected all of them, so before long we had all gathered at the geyser, ready to pitch in to fix the system, even though we all had plenty to do in our own fields and farms. It was part of our job. When the system broke, there was no one but us to fix it.

When the Western Governors' Association met recently, I was reminded of that experience. We each have so much work to do in our own fields, and yet the main valve in our system is broken. It is seriously hampering our ability to do our jobs.

I refer to the growing disfunction in the system of checks and balances between the state and federal governments. The system was based on balance between competing forces of government. But today the federal government has become too powerful, too prescriptive and too pervasive. The fact is, on most problems, unless the federal government sticks with broad policy, any solution they create will be some version of one-size-fits-all, and it won't work. Time after time that is proven.

Volumes have already been written about why this has happened. There is no simple explanation and plenty of blame to go around. But the fact remains, this system that's supposed to be based on checks and balances is out of balance.

Western governors heard the best evidence of that at their annual meeting:

Governor Roy Romer of Colorado said people have lost confidence in the federal government's one-size-fits-all approach.

Governor Mike Lowry of Washington, a former congressman, talked about the disproportionate impact of longtime congressional staff and the urgent need to redefine the roles of the state and federal governments.

Representatives of the Administration expressed frustration at having to administer statutes that lack flexibility and are used like a "meat cleaver" for enforcement rather than solving problems.

We heard pleas from private industry and local government for a more responsive and balanced system of governance.

A government out of balance is evident in past and present budgets. In 1927, 31 percent of all expenditures were made by the federal government. Today, the figure is double that 62 percent.

More laws have been passed in Congress in the last 20 years usurping state authority than in the previous 200 years combined.

Every area of government is affected: education, health care, human services, job training and environmental protection. But nowhere is this imbalance more evident than in the issues we face in the West.

Perhaps the most articulate and powerful statement I have heard on this problem came from a former western governor and now Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt.

The following are excerpts from a speech he gave more than a decade ago at a National Governors' Association meeting. And when I asked him recently if his perceptions had changed, he said, "Not at all."

"I share the concerns of my fellow governors. My sense of alarm is perhaps a little more extreme. A lot of observers in this country feel that, taken on a historic scale, the states are obsolete, they are headed the way of the passenger pigeon and the Edsel. Even the optimist, I think, would say the states at best are in dire danger of becoming simply administrative agents of Washington...it didn't begin way.

"The proper relationship between the states and federal government... was the centerpiece...of the most brilliant debate about the role of government in the history of western institutions...

"...that debate...has gone neglected. The reult is that the federal system is in total disarry.

"The United States Congress has lost all sense of restraint. It no longer even asks the question that Hamilton, Madison and Jefferson considered to be the central question...Is this an appropriate function for the federal system?

"...Hamilton and Jefferson would certainly ask...how have we allowed their creation a carefully layered construction of federal, state and local responsibilities to become scrambled into one great undifferentiated, amorphous omelet by a cook in Washington?

"States are at a crossroads."

Fourteen years have passed since he spoke those words. And matters have only worsened.

Who will restore balance in our system?

Congress? I think water will run uphill first.

The president? I'd like to suggest, whether it's a Republican or Democrat, the President is not likely to do it because the President must depend on Congress to make any meaningful changes.

Just like with the sprinkler system on my grandfather's farm, we cannot look to anyone but ourselves to fix the problem. Our system of government is based on the two major divisions of power, the states and national government, keeping each other in check and balance by competing for power.

The fact is, the states have been ineffective competitors. Our dispersed power, which makes us effective in governing, makes it difficult to compete with the concentrated power of Washington. Balance will only be restored if we figuratively gather at the main valve and collectively compete with the federal government. We must compete in the courts, compete in the halls of Congress, compete in the forums of public opinion, and compete with every other tool we have available.

I chose as the WGA theme this year: A stronger voice, a better balance, a West that works.

Do I harbor the illusion that western governors alone can fix this? No. But we can play a valuable role in moving toward a better balance.

This year our work plan calls for us to begin asking again what Bruce Babbitt called the questions of Hamilton, Madison and Jefferson, by establishing principles that we believe should govern the division of labor between the state and federal governments. We will then target one or two of the most difficult problems and determine options for action.

But just as important, we must become a more assertive voice for the West and for a better balance.

We were elected not just to govern our states. We have an historic role to play as stewards, entrusted by the founders of our country to be of sufficient voice to be an effective check and balance to the federal government.

If we are a stronger voice, we'll have a better balance. If we have a better balance, we'll have a West that works.