Federalism Chapter Objectives Explain the difference between federal

Federalism

• Chapter Objectives Explain the difference between federal and centralized systems of government, and give examples of each. • Show competing political interests at the Constitutional Convention led to the adoption of a federal system that was not clearly defined. • Outline the ways in which national and state powers have been interpreted by the courts. • State the reasons why federal grants-in-aid to the states have been politically popular, and cite what have proven to be their pitfalls. Distinguish between categorical grants and block grants. • Distinguish between mandates and conditions of aid with respect to federal grant programs to states and localities. Discuss whether or to what extent federal grants to the states have created uniform national policies comparable to those of centralized governments. • Evaluate the effect of devolution on relationships between the national and state governments. Assess its implications for citizens as taxpayers and as clients of government programs. Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 2

Governmental Structure • Federalism: a political system where local government units can make final decisions regarding some governmental activities and whose existence is protected • Unitary System: local governments are subservient to the national government Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 3

Figure 3. 1: Lines of Power in Three Systems of Government Copyright © Houghton

Positives and Negatives of Federalism • Negative view: Federalism blocks progress and protects powerful local interests • Positive view: Federalism contributes to governmental strength, political flexibility, and fosters individual liberty – Federalist #10: small political units allow all relevant interests to be heard – Federalism increases political activity Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 7

THEME A: WHO GOVERNS WHAT? FEDERALISM AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Federalism: A Bold New Plan • No historical precedent • Tenth Amendment was added as an afterthought to clarify the limits of the national government’s power • Elastic language in Article I: Necessary and Proper Clause expands federal power Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 8

Mc. Culloch v. Maryland • Could Congress charter a national bank? Yes, even though this power is not explicitly in the Constitution (Necessary and Proper Clause) • Could states tax the national bank? No, because “the power to tax is the power to destroy” Nullification • Do States have the right to declare federal laws unconstitutional? • Settled by the Civil War. Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 9

Federalism Over Time • Dual federalism: Both national and state governments are supreme in their own spheres, which should be kept separate – Particular state issues: law enforcement and education • Hard to make distinctions between state and federal spheres; distinctions between them were blurred • But Supreme Court has strengthened states’ rights in several recent cases – US v Lopez--guns in schools – US v Morrison--Violence Against Women Act – Printz v. US--background checks on gun purchasers Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 10

THEME A: DISCUSSION QUESTIONS • Historically power has flowed to the central government. What reasons exist for the states to continue exercising independent power? Given the Supreme Court’s decision in Mc. Culloch, what prevents the central government from assuming legal authority over any area of public policy? • Why doesn’t the federal government always intervene when states defy its authority? • Certain areas in Nevada permit prostitution, nine states have legalized the use of marijuana for “medical purposes”; Massachusetts has legalized same-sex marriage. Could the federal government legally intervene to forbid such practices in these states? Explain why or why not? Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 11

THEME B: WHO GOVERNS NOW? THE CONTEMPORARY POLITICS OF FEDERALISM Grants in Aid • Dramatically increased in scope in 20 th century -grants were a way for federal government to circumvent strict constructionist reading of federal power. • Grants were attractive to state officials for various reasons • Required broad congressional coalitions with wide dispersion of funds, because every state had incentive to seek grant money Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 12

Categorical Grants v. Revenue Sharing • Categorical grants for specific purposes defined by federal law; often require local matching funds • Block grants (sometimes called special revenue sharing or broad-based aid) devoted to general purposes with few restrictions—states preferred block to categorical grants • Revenue sharing (sometimes called general revenue sharing) requires no matching funds and can be spent on almost any governmental purpose Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 13

Figure 3. 2: The Changing Purpose of Federal Grants to State and Local Governments Why the change? Budget of the U. S. Government, Fiscal Year 2005, table 12. 2. Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 14

Figure 3. 3: Federal Grants to State and Local Governments, 1984 -2004 Budget of the U. S. Government, Fiscal Year 2002, Historical Tables, table 6. 1, and Budget of the U. S. Government, Fiscal Year 2005, table 12. 1. Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 15

Federal Aid and Federal Control • Conditions of aid: tell state governments what they must do if they wish to receive grant money • Mandates: federal rules that states or localities must obey, generally have little or nothing to do with federal aid – Civil rights – Environmental protection Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 16

Devolution • Devolution initiatives returned program management to the states, with some federal guidelines, but there is no guarantee of federal support • Block grants fund entitlements Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 17

The Devolution Revolution • Devolution proponents harbor a deep-seated ideological mistrust of federal government and believe that state governments are more responsive to the people • Deficit politics encouraged devolution • Devolution is supported by public opinion, but the strength of that support is uncertain – Case Study: AFDC to TANF (Welfare) Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 18

Congress and Federalism • Members of Congress represent conflicting constituencies • The erosion of parties increases political competition • Americans differ in the extent to which we like federal versus local decisions Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 19

THEME B: DISCUSSION QUESTIONS • Does the system of grant-in-aid upset the balance of federalism? Do grant programs enable Congress to dow what it pleases by bribing states into compliance? Or do these programs merely increase the likelihood of national policy uniformity? What would be the consequence if a state refused federal grant money? • To what extent have interest groups produced grants-in-aid, and to what extent have grants-in-aid produced interest groups? Who constitutes a governmental lobby? • How and why do conservatives and liberals differ over giving aid to the states without conditions? • Why can’t federal agencies attack complex problems by producing and implementing a coherent systematic policy? Why don’t (can’t) federal bureaucrats issue orders where necessary? • Does the recent push toward devolution give states too much power? Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 20