Democrats and Republicans often disagree, but they have more in common than they realize—especially when they are dissatisfied with the occupant of the Oval Office.

In those moments, the importance of the states—the role they play and the powers they hold—snaps into focus. But championing the states shouldn't depend on political convenience. Both parties would do well to consistently recognize the dangers of an overreaching federal government—and the benefits of more state autonomy.

America's Founders, very familiar with tyranny under the British monarchy, understood the perils of centralized power. That's why they built a system that delegates certain necessary powers to the federal government, but retains more among states, communities, and individuals. This is the heart of the 10th Amendment.

James Madison was clear in Federalist 46 that rather than being duplicative governing structures, "The federal and state governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes." Our federal government, in other words, was intended to serve only a limited set of functions.

Over time, however, we've seen the federal government overstep and meddle in issues where it has less local knowledge, effectiveness, and flexibility than states. As a result, the policy areas that the federal government has encroached upon, such as education, welfare, and energy, often result in one-size-fits-all, massively expensive mandates that fail to accommodate for differences across states, and serve taxpayers poorly.

Take the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which required states to implement standardized tests for grades 3-8 in order to receive federal funding. NCLB imposed uniform requirements on states and school districts, ignoring differences across states and districts and the unique circumstances of students across the country. As a result, the program didn't deliver the intended results. Despite billions in taxpayer funding, test scores remained flat years after implementation. While NCLB has been replaced with the slightly more flexible Every Student Succeeds Act, both pieces of legislation demonstrate that when the federal government attempts to solve state-level problems, the outcomes are subpar, and state innovation is stifled.

While the federal government has continued to test its limits and impose itself on the states, the Constitution makes clear where boundaries exist. Federal limits have been affirmed by recent Supreme Court cases, such as West Virginia v. EPA. In that case, West Virginia challenged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s authority to impose regulations to effectively control the state's energy policy through the Clean Power Plan. West Virginia's victory in the case reinforced state autonomy and confirmed the limited role of the federal government. States have primary authority to address energy and environmental matters within their own borders—not federal agencies.

When the states are able to practice this authority, they craft policies that improve American lives and livelihoods. From welfare and workforce development policies that help people break the cycle of poverty in their families, to more effective management of natural resources, to building infrastructure, states demonstrate more efficiency and innovation than federal agencies—and they do it while keeping their budgets balanced.

The states also offer a way to tame the partisanship and political division that rattle our country. The stakes are high when D.C. makes policy decisions for 340 million Americans. In contrast, policies shaped at the state and local level can reflect the values, needs, and priorities of the communities those governments serve—leading to more tailored, representative, and often less divisive solutions.

As America continues to grapple with polarization and growing distrust in Washington, let's hope more leaders champion state control—and not just when it's politically convenient. The genius of the Constitution, and the Founders that designed it, was in placing power closer to the people through the states—creating a government that is more responsible, accountable, and effective. Our nation should recapture that spirit.

Madison Ray is the senior director for the Center for Practical Federalism at State Policy Network.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.