Not really. That is what organizations like the ISO are for. Once standards are adopted but not law, many farms will standardize, while others will not. As long as there is information about what is being bought for the consumer, it will be up to them to decide whom to use. People will buy more from farms that use a standard, just like manufacturers make wireless Internet cards with an ISO standard. Several standards will prevail in the end. Much like USB and Firewire lasted, while others did not. Eventually it narrows down, but there will always be small farms with their own ideas on how things should be done, and consumers who want to buy from them. I personally like raw milk - as pasteurization kills all the nutrients from it. Will I die from it? Actually no. Standards today on cleanliness make the chance of getting a disease nill when it comes from a good farm. So why do we pasteurize? Because that way cows can be kept in shit conditions and then their milk is fried, thus taking out quite a bit of the nutrition, and killing the disease because of less-than-steller cow holding environments.
simply moving federal spending to state spending isn't really what I would call "spending cuts". You still have to pay for all of those, what difference does it make that it's a federal income tax or a state income tax?
OK, let's assume states will only need 50% of the money federal government requires to do the same stuff. 224(unemplyment and welfare) + 209 (medicaid) + 386 (medicare) +56 (education) +35 (housing and urban developing) + 20 (agriculture) + 12 (transportation ) = 942 assuming states will require only half of that for the same stuff they still need 471 billions. Oh, why should corporations pay income tax if people don't? Why should business owners be punished?
At what cost? I can make you totally safe, by burying you 1,000 feet underground, in a concrete cell with 40 foot walls. The question you need to resolve first is, does the US government have a right to tax it's citizens to police the world, put those citizens at risk of danger from blowback etc? Or is the first responsibility of the government to the taxpayers, and their long term security? South Korea is much mightier than North Korea. Both countries want to negotiate a reconciliation but the US keeps getting in the way. Why won't we stand down and allow for a united Korea, as negotiated by the North and South? Because Boeing, Haliburton et al don't make money when there are peaceful settlements. Spoken like a true paranoid neurotic. You've now done everything you could to be feared, and as the only line of defense, it has failed now that your enemy does not fear you. The reality is that there is no defense against terrorism. Anyone can make a homemade poison or bomb, projectile weapon etc, and a terrorist can be anyone. The only hope to beat terrorism, is to remove the motivation.
That assumes you actually save money I think it would cost for more since there a lot of jobs which would be duplicated in every state and back office work which is unnecessary right now because the federal government does it in a certain location.
Actually, the 50 state departments of agriculture already exist, despite the extremely wasteful federal version. http://www.doacs.state.fl.us/ Of course, the federal department of agriculture still has to operate in 50 states because the money gets divided to blue or red states depending on which party is in power at the moment. Great news Florida farmers! We're going to send our taxes to D.C. so they can give it to the California orange growers. Its their "turn" since the Democrats control Congress and the tax distribution this year. The same goes for education. The Department of Education doesn't hire teachers for your local school, the state education board and local school boards do that - and they provide 90%+ of the funding from property and sales taxes. The federal government accounts for about 7% of education funding in my city, yet the stupid standardized tests and nationally mandated abstinence absurdity is estimated to consume 25% of the schools' time and resources. As far as SCHIP, I'll just point out that this stands for "State Children's Health Insurance Program" and move on to the next topic. Transportation between states is actually a constitutionally mandated right for Congress to spend money on interstate roads. Local roads? Local responsibility. The benefits of state-run social programs: Constitutional - 9th, 10th amendment. Any power or spending authority not explicitly granted to congress is left to the states and the people. The income tax itself may be legal, but the things they spend it on are not. Efficient - Federal agencies don't prevent the need for state and local agencies, they only serve the interests of the dominant political party's "base states" and top donors. How is it efficient to raise money here, send it to D.C., just to hope that they will send it back to us so we can buy some new books or hire new teachers for the local school? Responsive / Accountable - This is "by the people, for the people" right? Well the people of Kentucky have different agricultural and educational needs than the people of New York. If the people of Kentucky don't like federal policy, changing the state policy won't help them because of the way Washington dominates the finances (follow our rules and redundant agencies and we will give you your state's money back)