California looking at cutting off the Feds' money supply

Post Reply New Topic

With Trump possibly moving against sanctuary cities in California, leaders here are looking at retaliating by recommended non-payment of tax to the federal government. This would really hurt the federal government, because California pays much more money to the Feds than it gets back from the Feds:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/0 ... p-threats/

I'd say if Trump and others are wanting to bite the hand that feeds them, come and try it.

EDIT: According to one of the news anchors on the video on that article, California only gets back 78 cents for every dollar it sends to Washington. We basically sustain the rest of the country. If they want to crap on us, say we're not "real Americans", and say that our voters pretty much don't matter and shouldn't matter, then let's cut them off. Let them pay their own way.

Short of that, California is looking to embroil the Trump Administration in endless litigation over the issue:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-p ... story.html

California has a good argument, as Supreme Court precedent says that federal funds can't be used to coerce, and in the Obamacare case, says that the Feds can't just change the conditions for receiving federal funds, but must make clear to states what they are getting into.

money comes with strings attached is the name of the game for the federal gov.

-We have seen them use the threat of cutting off funds to schools that won't comply with TITLE VII's "sex" = "gender"
-The department of Education's has threaten to cut off funds to schools that don't implement "Core Curriculum".
-Police departments are threatened into accepting federal practices or loss of fund sharing.

It seems like ALL federal spending comes with strings attached.

So, for that to be ruled unconstitutional would have huge impact elsewhere.