Thomas, J., dissenting
FNHRA’s scheme is illustrative of many modern federal spending programs, which often impose obligations directly on States as a condition of funding. For example, as a condition on highway funding, the Clean Air Act requires States to draft “State implementation plans” if their metropolitan areas fail to satisfy national ambient air quality standards. 42 U. S. C. §§7410 and 7509(a)–(b). Among other requirements, these plans must include emission limitations, compliance timetables, source monitoring, permitting systems, enforcement programs, and public participation. See §7410(a)(2). Other examples, spanning virtually every domain of national and state policy, abound.
The ubiquity of such spending conditions, combined with the Federal Government’s overwhelming financial heft, has made Spending Clause legislation an extraordinarily potent instrument of federal control.[1] Congress and federal
- ↑ The power of this tool has grown with the steady increase in federal income-tax revenues since the adoption of the Sixteenth Amendment. Although the Revenue Act of 1913 accounted for only 10% of federal revenue, by 1950, the income tax was the Nation’s largest source of revenue, and, by 2010, it accounted for a whopping 82% of federal revenue overall. E. Jensen, Did the Sixteenth Amendment Ever Matter? Does It Matter Today? 108 Nw. U. L. Rev. 799, 807, n. 44 (2014). This explosion of funds created unprecedented threats to federalism due to the increased use of grants. Federal “[m]onetary grants, so-called grants-in-aid, became more frequent during the 1930’s, and by 1950 they had reached $20 billion or 11.6% of state and local government expenditures.” National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U. S. 519, 674 (2012) (NFIB) (joint dissent of Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito, JJ.) (citation and footnote omitted). “By 1970 this number had grown to $123.7 billion or 29.1% of state and local government expenditures …. As of 2010, federal outlays to state and local governments came to over $608
§1396r(e)(4) (“[T]he State must have implemented and enforced the nursing facility administrator standards developed” by the Secretary for Health and Human Services); §1396r(e)(7)(B)(i)(I) (in the case of mentally ill residents, “the State … must review and determine … whether or not the resident … requires the level of services provided by a nursing facility” or the services of different institutions).
