Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Schools must provide sports for disabled, US says [View all]Igel
(35,293 posts)has been redefined.
Redefining terms mid-stream is really disruptive. And produces a lot of litigation, gobbling up resources.
In '75 the feds subsidized local activities a lot less. Many programs were specifically helped by or funded by the federal government. Now, with general slush-funds handed out to districts, it can be argued everything receives federal assistance.
That's part of the problem, and it can be narrowed and restricted through accounting practices. Or rendered all-encompassing by saying money's fungible, so $20 assistance means that everything is under federal purview.
Depends to what extent you like federal oversight, to the extent you agree with local policies or trust your local fellow citizens or to which you agree with fellow citizens at a thousand miles' remove.
Personally, I'm subject to many dozens of rules made by people who have no idea what my work environment is like. The rules are disconnected and sound good on paper--but when the paper has to become reality, things get screwed up. Massively. When they screw over those you don't like, it merits a shrug or at outburst of schadenfreud. When they screw over you or those you're responsible for, it provokes outrage. It's wrong to view the government as the enemy but worse for the government to view you as the enemy.