[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.5 In terms, then, of powers and functions, expenditures and services, local6 governments play a much more material part in delivering a greater variety7 of services to Arkansas citizens than they ever did in the past.Nonetheless,8 the import of local governments and politics has diminished in some ways.9 First, the local bosses and their  machines, which often meant the county10 judge and his courthouse crowd, have nearly disappeared.Candidates for11 statewide office rely more on mass-media appeals than on local leaders to12 convey their message and mobilize their votes; a less patronage hungry and[273], (3)13 more educated electorate is less dependent on and therefore less manageable14 by the favors and guidance of county officials; a more regularized election15 process has lessened the opportunities for either intimidation of the electorateLines: 71 to 716 or management of the outcome; and major reforms of county government  17 have diminished and divided the power that was once concentrated in the0.0pt PgV18 office of county judge.  19 Although these reforms have been broadly beneficial, they have cut deeplyNormal Page20 into the bargaining power that county officials once had in dealing withPgEnds: TEX21 governors and the legislature namely, be good to my county and I ll deliver22 you a nice vote.Legislators still try to cooperate with  their county officials,23 and candidates for statewide office still make an obligatory campaign call at[273], (3)24 the courthouse.But the alpha and omega of political power no longer resides25 there except in a few of the smallest counties.26 TheArkansasAssociation of Counties and theArkansas Municipal League,27 which represent the generalized interests, respectively, of county and city28 governments, are among the more significant lobbies at the state capitol.29 (They have been joined in recent sessions by a lobbyist for the city of Little30 Rock, a city that state law treats differently in a number of ways because of31 its size and that often finds itself out of step with the other predominantly32 rural members of the Municipal League.) Their most frequent programmatic33 pleas, however a fixed percentage of the state s general revenue, more state34  turn-back funds for local governments, genuine home rule for cities35 have been systematically denied or ignored.For years, tension has been36 particularly high over counties failure to gain automatic state reimbursement37 for all state-mandated duties required of them.The most burdensome of38 these  unfunded (or underfunded) mandates has been the requirement that39 counties house state prisoners whenever the state penitentiary system lacks 274 Politics at the Grassroots1 empty beds.Moreover, stronger interests have been particularly effective2 at quashing any enhancement of cities discretionary authority by arguing3 that independent power by municipalities would result in a  mishmash of4 regulations around the state.Recent sessions have increasingly seen local5 governments forced to play defense against efforts to further limit their6 autonomy, such as a 1997 effort to take away local governments power to7 regulate the use and sale of tobacco products.48 The fact that local governments now spend much of their time and energy9 organizing assaults on the state treasury symbolizes the second major way in10 which local politics has lost some of its luster.In Arkansas, as elsewhere in11 America, local governments have become increasingly trapped in a severe12 financial bind.It is the combined consequence of state restrictions on their[274], (4)13 taxing, spending, and borrowing powers; the effects of inflation on labor-14 intensive budgets; increased citizen expectations of more and better services;15 and a traditional reliance on the ever-unpopular and highly inelastic propertyLines: 78 t16 tax.The major  solution has been a now-entrenched dependence upon  17 intergovernmental transfers, that is, on funds collected by the national or0.0pt Pg18 state government but spent by counties, cities, and school districts.  19 In 2001 2, 50.6 percent of everything spent by local governments inLong Page20 Arkansas consisted of taxes collected by either the national governmentPgEnds: TE21 (3.7 percent) or state government (46.9 percent) and transferred to local22 governments for expenditure.As of the early 2000s, in other words, local23 governments in Arkansas were actually not raising five in every ten dollars[274], (4)24 that they were spending.525 Much of this  dependency reflects the increased reliance of local school26 districts on state funds.Despite counties and cities enhanced ability to tax27 sales within their borders they still received 14.6 percent and 17 percent of28 their income from intergovernmental transfers, respectively, in 1996 97.It29 remains difficult for them to call the tune when someone else is paying a30 significant portion of the piper s fees (at a time when citizens are demanding31 an enhanced repertoire).By the 1970s many mayors reported that they spent32 most of their time searching for federal funds, a situation that the attorney for33 the Arkansas Municipal League described in 1976 as  shameful because it34  did not strengthen democracy [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
  • zanotowane.pl
  • doc.pisz.pl
  • pdf.pisz.pl
  • agnieszka90.opx.pl