Chapter 2 Federalism:The Power Plan

1. Chapter 2Federalism:The Power Plan Intergovernmental relationships are like different types of cake.

2. Federalism • Sharing of power and responsibilities between central and regional governments. • Central and regional governments operate as independent political actors.

3. Systems of government • Unitary: Central government delegates authority to regional governments. • United Kingdom • Confederal: Regional governments delegate authority to the central government. • Articles of Confederation • United Nations

4. Systems of government (cont’d) • Federal: Power is shared between central and regional governments. • United States

5. The Roots of the Federal System • The Framers worked to create a political system that was halfway between the failed confederation of the Articles of Confederation and the tyrannical unitary system of Great Britain. • The three major arguments for federalism are: • the prevention of tyranny; • the provision for increased participation in politics; • and the use of the states as testing grounds or laboratories for new policies and programs.

6. State - Centered federalism (Jefferson)vsNation-Centered Federalism ( Hamilton)

7. Advantages of federalism • Overcomes weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation. • The states, operating as sovereign units, have closer ties to the electorate than the national government does. • Fifty different sets of rules allow policy experimentation and greater flexibility. • Experimentation allows a more efficient pursuit of national policy goals.

8. Disadvantages of federalism • Multiple political actors can promote duplication and confusion. • Coordination becomes difficult because states operate as independent and sovereign units. • Fifty different sets of rules and regulations not only increase complexity but also create potential for inequality in services and policy across states.

9. The Powers of Government National Government - one of delegated powers. 3 types of delegated power: - enumerated (expressed) - implied - inherent

10. Enumerated powers - literally expressed Article I, section 8 • lay and collect taxes, duties, and imposts • provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States • regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the states, and with Indian tribes • coin money and regulate the value thereof • declare war

11. Implied Powers- not literally stated but reasonable implied • Article I, Section 8, clause 18 “necessary and proper clause” or elastic clause • The necessary and proper clause has often been used to expand the powers of the national government.

12. Inherent powers Powers which belong to the national government by virtue of their existence

13. Power challenge I: national powers • Enumerated powers: Specific grants of authority • Implied powers: Federal government has the power to pass all laws “necessary and proper” to provide for the “general welfare” of the United States. • National supremacy clause: Federal law trumps state law; “preemption”

14. Reserved powers or State Powers (police powers) • Most of State powers come from the Tenth Amendment that says: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

15. Power challenge II: state powers • 10th Amendment gives all powers not designated to the federal government nor denied to the states to the states and the people. • 14th Amendment says that no state shall abridge upon the privileges or immunities of any citizen and that each state must provide due process and equal protection for all citizens.

16. Concurrent powers- Powers shared by the national and state governments

17. Denied Powers • Article I, section 9 lays out powers denied to the central government. • For example: give preference to ports of one state over another • Article I, section 10 lays out the powers denied to the states. • For example: enter into treaties, alliances, or confederations

18. The Supremacy Clause Article IV says that federal law is supreme. (So if the states and federal government argue, the feds win.)

19. Power challenge III: the referee • The U.S. Constitution: Supreme law of the land • The U.S. Supreme Court: Supreme interpreter of the Constitution • Court philosophy determines nature of power challenge between federal government and the states. • State-centered • Alabama v. Garrett • Nation-centered • Bush v. Gore

20. The Evolution and Development of Federalism • The allocation of powers in our federal system has changed dramatically over the years. • The Supreme Court in its role as interpreter of constitution has been a major player in the redefinition of our Federal system. • McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) • Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) • Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

21. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) • McCulluch was the first major decision by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall about the relationship between the states and the national government. • The Court upheld the power of the national government and denied the right of a state to tax the bank. • The Court’s broad interpretation of the necessary and proper clause paved the way for later rulings upholding expansive federal powers.

22. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) • The Gibbons case centered on the conflict between the states and the powers of Congress. • Could New York grant a monopoly concession on the navigation of the Hudson River? The Hudson River forms part of the border between New York and New Jersey and the U.S. Congress also licensed a ship to sail the Hudson. • The main constitutional question in Gibbons was about the scope of Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause. • In Gibbons, the Court upheld broad congressional power over interstate commerce.

23. Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) • The Supreme Court articulated the idea of concurrent powers and dual federalism in which separate but equally powerful levels of government is preferable, and the national government should not exceed its enumerated powers. • The Taney Court held that Mr. Scott was not a U.S. citizen and therefore not entitled to sue in federal court. • The case was dismissed and Scott remained a slave. • Taney further wrote that Congress had no power to abolish slavery in the territories and slaves were private property protected by the Constitution.

24. The Civil War and Beyond • Dual federalism remained the Supreme Court's framework for federalism even after the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. • Dual federalism finally ended in the 1930s, when the crisis of the Great Depression demanded powerful actions from the national government.

25. Stages of federalism • Dual federalism (layered cake federalism) • Nation-centered federalism vs. state-centered federalism • Alexander Hamilton vs. John Calhoun • States and the federal government have separate and distinct jurisdictions. • Advocated by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney • Philosophy of the Court until the early twentieth century.

26. The Changing Nature of Federalism • Prior to the 1930s, many scholars used the analogy of a layer cake to describe federalism. • Each layer had clearly defined powers and responsibilities. • After the New Deal, the analogy of a marble cake seemed more appropriate because the lines of authority were much more mixed. • This marble cake federalism is often called cooperative federalism and has a much more powerful national government. • States have a cooperative role, as did many cities.

27. Stages of federalism (cont’d) • Cooperative federalism (marble cake federalism) • Federal government and state governments have overlapping and inseparable jurisdictions. • World War I, Great Depression, and World War II served as primary catalysts to the rise of cooperative federalism. • Characterized by federal government funding programs and state government implementing them (New Deal).

28. Cooperative federalism in action • Grants-in-aid • Categorical grants: “Here’s some money, but you do exactly what I tell you to do with it.” • Block grants: “Here’s some money, spend it how you like as long as you it relates to what I want.” • General revenue sharing grants: “Here’s some money, do whatever you want with it.” • Unfunded mandates: “I don’t have the money, but you still gotta do exactly what I tell you to do.”

29. Federalism and the Supreme Court • By the 1980s and 1990s, many Americans began to think that the national government was too big, too strong, and too distant to understand their concerns. • The Supreme Court, once again, played a role in this new evolution of federalism.

30. Stages of federalism (cont’d) • New Federalism • Transfer of policy responsibility from the federal government to state governments. • Decrease federal funding while increasing policymaking authority of the states—“devolution.” • Tradeoff between financial dependence and discretionary power

31. Ad hoc federalism • New Federalism is gradually shifting away from its core principle of transferring policy responsibility to the states. • Role of the federal government is being decided on an issue-by-issue basis.

32. Federalism in action • No Child Left Behind Act • Problem: • Declining student performance • Solution: • Federal funding requires tough performance standards • Unintended consequences: • Localities forced to make huge investment to implement testing requirements. • Localities suing states, arguing that testing requirements represent an unfunded mandate. • States opting out of federal funds and performance standards.

33. Conclusion • Federalism provides a means for accomplishing both federal and state policy goals. • Federalism offers distinct advantages and disadvantages. • In general, policy responsibility is shifting toward state governments. • However, power sharing relationships between the federal government and state governments vary across time and across issues.

34. Continuity and Change • Federalism as outlined at Philadelphia in 1787 has evolved considerably over time. • Initially, the states remained quite powerful, and the national government was small and weak. • Over time the national government became progressively stronger. • However, we have a Court today that is more interested in reinvesting power in the Tenth Amendment and in the states.