Gov. Terry Branstad delivered his 17th Condition of the State address Tuesday, and among his concerns, like last year, was a proposal to reduce commercial property taxes by 40 percent in the next eight years.

The issue for us is not how much tax we have to pay. As students, our property taxes (such as they exist) are factored into constant rents we pay every month. We do not have to deal with those bills every year.

Our concern is instead on Branstad’s solution to prevent local governments from making up revenue lost from commercial tax decreases by raising residential property taxes. “Our plan prevents a shift to other classes of property by limiting local government spending and by cutting in half the annual growth limit for residential and agricultural property,” Branstad said in his address.

In other words, we can expect that local governments would be statutorily forbidden from raising taxes beyond a certain amount. Offering such a proposal is to forget the federalism that is inherent in the organization of the United States and which ensures that people across the country are involved in their communities. All too often we leave federalism dormant; taking advantage of it, however, makes us more educated about the world around us and serves as a lesson in interacting with people.

Current political discourse is often tinged with frustration about the federal government in Washington, D.C., doing too many things, of taking policymaking away from families and states. The Department of Education has come under fire because, some politicians assert, it makes educating children a national, not state or family, issue.

Why do we not take the same attitude toward state limitations on local powers? Like the U.S. Constitution, the Iowa Constitution acknowledges that the rights included in the constitution are not the people’s only rights. It also includes provisions for municipal and county home rule as if those are supposed to be very real parts of our lives.

Freedom in a republic only exists if its population is involved in making policy. Limiting taxes is a very nice idea. But committing the issue to a state government miles away from a locality — with different priorities, rules, norms and crises of its own — disallows counties and cities from resolving their own issues.

What if a city or county wants the best schools in the state, the most responsive police and fire departments, the best water quality or the best roads? Those all cost money, and revenue comes from taxes. A law limiting the amounts that can be collected would prevent people from making their own decisions. Independence requires the power to make mistakes.