Restoring Federalism in Louisiana

Louisiana, with a state budget that has been nearly half federal dollars over the last several years, is no stranger to the concept of strings attached. Louisiana famously succumbed to federal pressure to comply with the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984—the last state to do so—which raised the legal drinking age to 21, all for the sake of keeping federal highway funding.

Such heavy reliance on federal money undermines the principle of federalism: the practice of dividing—and thus, limiting—power among different levels of government to prevent central overreach. The 2026 Federalism Scorecard from the State Policy Network’s Center for Practical Federalism ranks Louisiana 19th of 50, with a score of 16.50, well behind leaders like Utah (86.90) and Tennessee (53.95).

The Scorecard measures how vulnerable each state is to federal agencies that exceed their authority. Its premise is simple: decisions that affect Louisiana families should be made by the people they elect at the appropriate level of government.

The threat of overreach can be constant if states are not vigilant. Federal agencies often work through their state agency counterparts, and a legislature that cannot oversee, investigate, and reverse its own agencies, the report notes, leaves citizens exposed to “undemocratic and often undetected federal influence.”

On that front, the Scorecard highlighted two major reforms Louisiana enacted in 2025:

• A REINS-style law (SB 59) requiring legislative approval of significant agency regulations. Louisiana was one of six states to pass such a law in 2025, which the report calls the fastest growth of any protection it tracks.
• A judicial non-deference statute (HB 99 of 2025), which stops courts from simply deferring to agency interpretations of the law.

Louisiana also earned strong ratings for restricting agency lobbying, a protection the report says only two states have, and for legislative oversight of Medicaid state plans.

Here is how Louisiana fared on all 19 measures:

The weak spot: federal money

Louisiana is rated unprotected on 11 of 19 measures, and many involve federal grants. In practice, that means unelected agency officials can apply for, accept, and commit the state to federal dollars without lawmakers or elected executives signing off. This not only undermines federalism and self-governance, but also prevents lawmakers from exercising legislative oversight on issues related to public policy and the state budgeting process when federal funds are discontinued.

Louisiana lawmakers have tried to close part of this gap before. In 2024, HB 318 by House Appropriations Chairman Jack McFarland would have required the Division of Administration to report to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget each year on the federal grants and programs each state agency intends to apply for, and would have authorized the committee to hold hearings on federal funds. The bill passed the House 99-0 but was not heard in the Senate Finance Committee.

As the report notes, federal officials “frequently use those funds as leverage to elicit compliance with goals that are not always in the best interests of communities.”

Federal money is never free. Grants bring audits, matching requirements, maintenance-of-effort rules, and other costs Louisianans must bear. Federal money is also never guaranteed: a lesson that many states are learning now. As the report points out, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will raise state Medicaid and SNAP cost responsibility, with states facing higher SNAP shares if error rates are high. Covid-era programs are also winding down, creating “fiscal cliffs” because in many cases one-time money was not managed as such. States that are continuing to spend at heightened levels instead of budgeting responsibly are in a tough position.

Louisiana has much room to improve in its score on internal checks, or how much control a state’s elected legislature has over its own executive-branch agencies. The state has no dedicated legislative oversight function that meets the report’s standard, no independent regulatory review entity with real authority (although Governor Landry’s Office of State Inspector General is making significant progress in this area), and no easy way for citizens to halt an agency action while a court decides whether it is legal.

Seven steps to restore the checks on federal influence

The 2026 Federalism Scorecard points to common-sense reforms states can implement to restore the principles of federalism, and several have working models in other states.

1. Require legislative approval of federal grants. This is the Scorecard’s single most heavily weighted measure, worth 25 points. The Legislature should review and approve grant applications before they are submitted, or awards before they are accepted. The executive and legislative branches must be more tightly connected on matters involving the budget and grantor influences on policymaking.
2. Give lawmakers time to say no. At minimum, agencies should notify legislative leaders of pending awards and give them a window to review and decline. Georgia requires agencies to present the grant’s purpose, timeline, and fiscal impact to legislative leaders.
3. Put elected officials in the driver’s seat. State law should require sign-off from the governor (or his designee) or legislative leadership before any agency accepts federal funds.
4. Count the true cost before accepting. South Carolina’s Federal and Other Funds Oversight Act requires every agency to disclose matching requirements, maintenance-of-effort obligations, and other strings to legislative budget committees before funds are appropriated. Louisiana should do the same.
5. Plan for the money to stop. The Scorecard now gives credit only for contingency plans written into statute, with specific mechanisms and regular updates. Louisiana should require agencies to track federal dependence and prepare for delays, cuts, or loss of federal funds.
6. Shine a light on federal guidance. In Utah and Oklahoma, every state agency must publicly disclose the federal guidance it receives. Oklahoma’s 2026 law also voids guidance used as binding law without going through formal rulemaking.
7. Strengthen legislative oversight at home. Louisiana should create active oversight committees that hold regular hearings, give the Legislature broad subpoena power, and require legislative approval before Clean Air Act plans are changed.

Louisiana already has the model for this last step. Lawmakers have strong oversight of Medicaid state plans, keeping elected officials in charge of changes. The same principle should apply to Clean Air Act plans and federal grants.

Laws on paper, leaders in practice

SB 59 and HB 99 of 2025 have put the state among national leaders on regulatory review and limiting judicial deference. But on federal money, where the state is most vulnerable, bureaucrats can still commit Louisiana to federal strings without lawmakers or elected executives signing off.

The next legislative session can finish the job by putting federal grants under more careful and coordinated control of executive and elected officials, with full knowledge of their true cost and a plan for the day the money stops. Liberty and responsibility go hand in hand, and a state that can’t say no to Washington’s dollars isn’t fully governing itself.