State GOPs use clout to rein in Dems
Republicans ‘lash back’ at those who will not comply
When Veronica Zavaleta fled an abusive partner in Mexico City in 2001, she felt a sense of security in her new Nashville home.
Today, Zavaleta, 43, said the town that embraced her years ago feels less welcoming, in part because state officials helped block a pro-immigrant measure by city leaders that would limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
“I feel like I should be able to reach my local authorities,” said Zavaleta, who owns a cleaning company. “I don’t see why I can’t have a voice.”
Republicans control both houses of Congress, the White House and the state legislatures in 32 states. But Democrats have a wild card: They still lead a majority of the country’s largest cities, often introducing policies that clash with the ideals espoused by the Republican Party.
That dynamic has frustrated state GOP leaders, who increasingly focus efforts on overriding decisions they deem too liberal in cities that include Nashville, Austin and Phoenix.
The practice, known as preemption, has ranged from blocking cities in Texas from regulating trees on private land to forbidding others in Arizona from requiring companies to offer employee sick leave.
The stakes have grown more punitive for cities that disobey.
“They’ve taken this opportunity to lash back at what have been, in their opinion, years of progressive policies that are ideologically different than what their constituents believe in,” said Lori Riverstone-Newell, an associate professor at Illinois State University who recently published a preemption study.
Tennessee’s two largest cities, Nashville and Memphis, often are at odds with a state Legislature where 101 of the 132 members are Republicans.
State lawmakers overrode moves by the cities this year to reduce penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana.
In late June, the threat of ac- tion by GOP legislators, which included a phone call between the Republican House speaker and Nashville Mayor Megan Barry, a Democrat, helped sink a city measure that sought to prevent the use of city funds and facilities to enforce federal immigration law.
“What’s the point of my even attempting to work on legislative efforts here if at the end of the day (the legislature) enjoys making sport of doing this,” said Nashville City Councilman Freddie O’Connell, who supported the failed measure.
Legislatures nationwide have approved laws prohibiting local action on both marijuana and sanctuary cities.
Some states have taken a more extreme approach, known as super pre-emption, that punishes elected officials who do not comply.
A so-called sanctuary cities ban, passed this year in the Texas Legislature, calls for criminal charges and fines of up to $25,000 a day for local officials who prevent law enforcement officers from asking people they detain about their immigration status.
The law takes effect Sept. 1 butmany of the state’s largest cities have challenged it in court.
“Where do we have all our problems in America? Not at the state level, run by Republicans, but in our cities that are mostly controlled by Democrat mayors and Democrat city councilmen and women,” Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said Aug. 4. “That’s where you see liberal policies. That’s where you see high taxes. That’s where you see street crime.”
During a special session this month, lawmakers considered legislation that would constrain the ability of local governments to raise taxes without voters’ consent and regulate the bathroom use of transgender Texans.
Another measure, which stems from a run-in that Gov. Greg Abbott had with officials in Texas’ capital city of Austin, would impose restrictions on local governments’ ability to prevent property owners from cutting down trees on their land.
Texas mayors have balked at the legislation.
“I was in the Legislature for 26 years and I constantly heard from many conservatives who spoke negatively of big government and the expansion of big government in the region,” Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said. “Now, we find that the state government is really reaching down and telling local governments what they can and cannot do and pretty much trying to treat all cities as if we are the same.”
LOCAL FRUSTRATION
In Arizona, officials overrode local measures on elections, e-cigarettes, fire sprinklers and firearms regulations.
In Wisconsin, lawmakers preempted a rule from 1938 that required Milwaukee employees to live within the city’s limits.
Michigan’s GOP-led legislature prohibited cities and counties from banning, regulating or imposing fees on plastic bags.
And in Florida, legislators stopped local governments from regulating ride-sharing companies such as Uber and Lyft.
Defenders of pre-emption are quick to say it is not about political retribution but rather a need to correct improper moves by local governments.
“Left-wing special interest groups are going to local governments to advance their issues,” said Jonathan Williams, chief economist and vice president for the Center for State Fiscal Reform at the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC.
Williams, whose conservativeleaning group provides “model” legislation for lawmakers, cited the advancement of tax and regulatory measures as examples of issues that he says special interest groups are pushing at the local level.
Susan Haynie, the Republican mayor of Boca Raton, Fla., said pre-emption measures from state lawmakers such as one that would prevent the placement of wireless facilities in public rights-of-way simply stifle local governments.
“This is not a partisan issue,” she said. “This is a common sense issue.”
Haynie said lawmakers’ efforts to override local governments are a departure from the oft-espoused Republican credo that the best form of governance is local.
“They have this attitude that they can do a better job,” she said. “They’re in session once a year for a couple of months. We cannot depend on them to assist us in running our cities on a daily basis.”
A HEAVY-HANDED APPROACH
Nationwide, there have been preemption laws in 27 states over minimum wage, 21 states over paid leave, 38 over ride-sharing and 42 over tax and expenditure issues, according to the National League of Cities.
Riverstone-Newell called the current wave of pre-emption a heavy-handed approach aimed at serving the interests of business groups or setting morality standards on local governments.
“Republicans have long argued that the lowest level of government that can deliver a service should be the one to do so. So their pre-emption of local laws and regulations for the sake of state uniformity is hypocritical,” Riverstone-Newell said.
Williams and Jon Russell, director of the American City County Exchange, a division of ALEC, point out that while the U.S. Constitution indicates the federal government’s power derives from the states, there’s no such provision for cities.
“It was understood by the framers that cities and counties were creations of the states and the states would govern them,” Russell said. He added that there’s hypocrisy among Democrats who criticize pre-emption when Republicans use it but not when members of their party do.
Contributing: John Moritz and Madlin Mekelburg from Texas, Mary Jo Pitzl from The Arizona Republic, Kathleen Gray from the Detroit Free Press and Jason Stein from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
“I constantly heard from many conservatives who spoke negatively of big government. ... Now, we find that the state government is really reaching down and telling local governments what they can and cannot do.” Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner