Public Often Prefers Local Or State
To Federal Regulation

Washington, DC —The U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR) released recently the results of its 1992 national poll on public attitudes toward governments and taxes.

This year, the Commission asked citizens about one of the biggest intergovernmental issues today — federal preemption of state and local powers.

Preemption refers to the power of the federal government to override state laws under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution. For example, in 1984 the Congress preempted the power of local governments to regulate cable TV rates. More than 50 percent of all federal preemptions enacted in our 203-year history have been passed by the Congress only in the last 23 years.

ACIR's poll asked about five issues now subject to debate about whether the federal government should preempt state or local powers.

Food Labeling. Asked if the federal government should preempt state powers to regulate the labeling of health risks on food products, 75 percent of the respondents said that the federal government should do so. Only 18 percent said the states should regulate such labeling, while 8 percent did not know, or gave no answer. Support for federal preemption was strongest among persons who completed college (86 percent) and among those with high incomes (84 percent).

Banking. Support for federal regulation of interstate banking was expressed by 50 percent of the public, compared to 38 percent who supported continued state regulation. Support for federal regulation increased from 34 percent of persons who have not completed high school to 60 percent of those with a college education. There was also a marked difference by age, with 54 percent of the respondents under age 35 supporting federal regulation, compared to 39 percent over age 65.

Insurance. Asked whether the federal government should take over the regulation of companies that sell life, fire, property, casualty, and automobile insurance, only 37 percent said that the federal government should do so, while 51 percent supported continued state regulation. There were no marked differences of opinion among various subgroups of respondents.

Pesticide Use. Only 37 percent of the public supported federal preemption of local government's powers to regulate pesticide use on home lawns and public grounds. Continued local regulation was supported by 52 percent of the respondents. The strongest support for federal regulation was expressed by persons in households having annual incomes of more than $40,000 (46 percent) and by respondents living in the suburbs (45 percent).

Low-Income Housing. Only 20 percent of the public expressed support for federal preemption of local regulation of the location and building of low-income housing in communities. Fully 72 percent supported continued local regulation. Although local regulation received majority support from all subgroups in the poll, local regulation was supported by 75 percent of the white respondents, but by only 53 percent of the black respondents. Local regulation also was supported by 78 percent of the high-income respondents, compared to 61 percent of the low-income respondents. The strongest support for local regulation was voiced by persons in the Midwest (86 percent) and the least in the Northeast (58 percent). Support for local regulation was greater outside of metropolitan areas (79 percent) than in suburbs (69 percent) and central cities (68 percent). Also, homeowners (76 percent) were more supportive of local regulation than renters (65 percent).

"These poll results are much-needed signals," said Robert B. Hawkins.Jr., ACIR Chairman, "because federal preemption is growing by leaps and bounds. The public has more trust and confidence in their local and

October 1992 / Illinois Municipal Review / Page 17

state governments than they do in the federal government; yet, the federal government continues to diminish state and local powers. The public, however, is clearly able to distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate federal roles."

"Federal preemption has skyrocketed for many reasons," added John Kincaid, ACIR Executive Director, "including broad interpretations of the Congress's constitutional powers, the federal interest in protecting rights nationwide, federal entry into new fields of regulation, interest groups seeking to make their views national policy, and concern about economic competition from the common market being created by the European Community."

"Another reason for more federal preemption," he added, "is more aggressive economic regulation by state and local governments. As some industry representatives have put it, they now prefer to be regulated by one 500-pound gorilla in Washington than by 50 monkeys on steroids. Last year, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld local regulation of pesticide use. Now there is a bill in Congress to preempt that local power."

Chairman Hawkins said that "ACIR takes no position on whether state or local regulation of particular businesses is good or bad. The purpose of this poll was to find out for the first time what the public thinks about some of the issues involved in the galloping federal preemption of the powers of their state and local governments." •

NOTICE ALL CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESSED TO THE ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 500 E. CAPITOL AVE. P.O. BOX 3387 SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 62708 Your Cooperation Will Be Appreciated

Page 18 / Illinois Municipal Review / October 1992