FEDERALISM IS GOAL, BUT TASK IS GIGANTIC

Hoping their work will snowball into a national movement, governors and legislators gathered recently in hopes of reclaiming state authority from Washington.

At their three-day federalism summit, the officials came up with four ways states might wrest from Washington its growing power to rule and regulate citizens lives.

The recommendations are of the vague and general sort, but their aim is worthwhile. Rather than whine and complain about the increase of federal control and regulation over citizens' lives -- or worse, to play the collectivist game that says it is OK to take taxpayer dollars as long as my state gets its fair share of federal kickbacks -- these elected state officials are trying to restore something the nation's founders held dear: federalism. Federalism simply asserts that state governments are better suited, and thus constitutionally empowered, to govern Americans' lives than is the federal government.

The founders established our nation on the rationale that the greatest government intervention ought to be on the local level. The next greatest trespass must be on the state level and the least on the federal level. This is so for practical reasons.

Federalism, and local government control, is market-driven. If taxes and regulations become too intrusive on the local -- or, to a lesser extent, on the state -- level, then it is relatively easy to vote with your feet and move to a different locale. People have more confidence in governments that are closer to home. But how easy or desirable is it to move to another country? Unless the federalists are successful, taxpayers today have few options if they seek to reduce the burden of government on their lives.

Involved in this effort are the executive committees of the National Governors Association, the Council of State Governments, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the American Legislative Exchange Council and the State Legislative Leaders Foundation.

These groups aren't simply grousing They are offering solutions. Nor is their project an end in itself. It is merely the beginning of a process to rebalance the federal system of governance.

The process likely will be a prolonged one that will require real measures to counter growing collectivism on the national level. Anything short of that is an exercise in futility.