No, I hadn't seen that. But it sounds like a pretty good idea to me. There are certainly a lot of government programs that could be either done by the states or eliminated completely with little chance of bad results.

Unfortunately, if things like have been proposed by Utah were accepted by the federal government and done by the states, the results would be a miniscule reduction in federal spending--way less than 1% for the programs Utah mentions. Check the federal budget yourself to see what I mean.

The value of the Utah proposal is far more "sending a message" regarding state's rights than it is anything that would materially change the amount of debt we are leaving to coming generations. That result doesn't devalue such a message--I think it should be sent anyway. But to think that far more fundamental and Draconian changes to both spending as well as taxation won't be necessary is simply incorrect.

Again, look at the federal budget and national debt yourself; see if you can figure out a way to minimize the weight of the debt we will leave future generations. It will soon become clear to anyone who does this that what will be necessary will be far more lifestyle changing than anything like what is suggested by Utah.