by Kerby Anderson During this election season you may hear candidates use a phrase that has been used by politicians for the last two decades. When a social issue is discussed, the politician merely responses that we should “let the states decide.” After all, isn’t that what federalism is all about? Various states may come to different conclusions about issues ranging from restrictions on abortion to the legalization of marijuana. It sounds reasonable to “let the states decide” until you look at what is happening around the country. Yesterday, for example, I talked about how the Obama Education Department is threatening to pull $6 million in federal funds from a school district in Illinois because they won’t let a transgender male undress in the girl’s locker room. The Obama Justice Department is now threatening to cut off education funding to the entire state of North Carolina because of a law that prohibits men and boys from using women’s restrooms. This was a law passed by the legislature and signed by the governor. But some in the Justice Department believe it violates civil rights laws. These are just two current examples of many more cases where the federal bureaucracy is using financial threats to force state and local governments to do what they demand. It has become apparent that progressives in these federal agencies are not content to “let the states decide.” They are using governmental power to bully state and local governments. For decades, we have heard politicians argue that many of these social issues are state matters and that is why we should “let the states decide.” It is becoming apparent that we should now be asking them what they are willing to do at the federal level to stop what these federal agencies are doing. Often when politicians say, “every state should decide” they are really saying they plan to do nothing. It is time to call their bluff.