Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

American Federalism Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "American Federalism Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 American Federalism Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania

3 Biblical Root of Federalism  Federalism  From the Latin foedus  Meaning  Covenant  Federalism  From the Latin foedus  Meaning  Covenant

4  The first federal political ideas articulated in North America were those of the Puritans’ Reformed Protestant  Covenant Theology  Federal Theology  The first federal political ideas articulated in North America were those of the Puritans’ Reformed Protestant  Covenant Theology  Federal Theology

5 Articles of Confederation, 1781 “Whereas the Delegates of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, did … agree to certain articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of Newhampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhodeisland and Providence Plantations ….” Preamble “Whereas the Delegates of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, did … agree to certain articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of Newhampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhodeisland and Providence Plantations ….” Preamble

6 Powers of Confederal Government  War, peace, treaties, and alliances  Appoint all U.S. land and naval officers  Build and equip a navy  Send and receive ambassadors  Decide rules for capture on land or water  Grant letters of marque and reprisal  Try piracies and felonies committed on the high seas  Settle inter-state boundary disputes  Regulate value of coinage  Fix standard of weights and measures  Regulate trade with Indians outside states  Establish post offices and postal rates  Borrow money or emit bills of credit on U.S.  War, peace, treaties, and alliances  Appoint all U.S. land and naval officers  Build and equip a navy  Send and receive ambassadors  Decide rules for capture on land or water  Grant letters of marque and reprisal  Try piracies and felonies committed on the high seas  Settle inter-state boundary disputes  Regulate value of coinage  Fix standard of weights and measures  Regulate trade with Indians outside states  Establish post offices and postal rates  Borrow money or emit bills of credit on U.S.

7 Articles of Confederation, 1781 Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. Article I Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. Article I

8 U.S. Federal Constitution, 1788 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Preamble “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Preamble

9 Principal Federal Powers  Commerce  Foreign affairs and defense  Commerce  Foreign affairs and defense

10 Federal Commerce Powers  Borrow money  Regulate interstate, foreign, and Indian commerce  Enact uniform naturalization laws  Enact uniform bankruptcy laws  Coin money and regulate its value  Fix national weights and measures standards  Punish counterfeiting of securities and coin  Establish post offices and post roads  Grant patents and copyrights  Create courts inferior to the Supreme Court  Borrow money  Regulate interstate, foreign, and Indian commerce  Enact uniform naturalization laws  Enact uniform bankruptcy laws  Coin money and regulate its value  Fix national weights and measures standards  Punish counterfeiting of securities and coin  Establish post offices and post roads  Grant patents and copyrights  Create courts inferior to the Supreme Court

11 Federal Foreign Affairs & Defense Powers  Define and punish piracies and felonies on high seas and offenses against law of nations  Declare war  Grant letters of marque and reprisal  Make rules for captures on high seas  Raise and support armies  Provide and maintain a navy  Govern land and naval forces  Call up militia to execute federal laws, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions  Organize, arm, and discipline militia  Govern D.C. and territories  Define and punish piracies and felonies on high seas and offenses against law of nations  Declare war  Grant letters of marque and reprisal  Make rules for captures on high seas  Raise and support armies  Provide and maintain a navy  Govern land and naval forces  Call up militia to execute federal laws, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions  Organize, arm, and discipline militia  Govern D.C. and territories

12 James Madison “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite.” Federalist 45 “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite.” Federalist 45

13 Tenth Amendment “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.”

14 Federal a.k.a. National Government State Governments Local Governments Common View of Federal System as “Levels”

15 Federal System as Matrix of Governments Federal System as Matrix of Governments States Local Govts Commerce Defense and Foreign Affairs Social Welfare Civil Rights

16 Expansive Federal Power Clauses  Necessary and proper clause (Article I, Section 8) a.k.a elastic clause, implied powers clause, sweeping clause  Supremacy clause (Article VI)  Necessary and proper clause (Article I, Section 8) a.k.a elastic clause, implied powers clause, sweeping clause  Supremacy clause (Article VI)

17 Dual Federalism,  Federal and state governments occupy separate spheres of sovereign power and should not interfere with each other  U.S. Constitution does not grant federal government authority to fund state internal improvements (i.e., infrastructure)  “national government is one of enumerated powers only; Also, the purposes which it may constitutionally promote are few; Within their respective spheres the two centers of government are “sovereign” and hence “equal”; and The relation of the two centers with each other is one of tension rather than collaboration.” Edward S. Corwin  Federal and state governments occupy separate spheres of sovereign power and should not interfere with each other  U.S. Constitution does not grant federal government authority to fund state internal improvements (i.e., infrastructure)  “national government is one of enumerated powers only; Also, the purposes which it may constitutionally promote are few; Within their respective spheres the two centers of government are “sovereign” and hence “equal”; and The relation of the two centers with each other is one of tension rather than collaboration.” Edward S. Corwin

18 Debate Over Nature of the Union  Federal Constitution as Compact among the States  Federal Constitution as Covenant of the People  Federal Constitution as Compact among the States  Federal Constitution as Covenant of the People

19 Civil War War Between the States War of Northern Aggression ,000 Deaths War Between the States War of Northern Aggression ,000 Deaths

20 Fourteenth Amendment, 1868 “No State shall … abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;… deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Section 1 “No State shall … abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;… deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Section 1

21 Texas v. White, 1869 “The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States.”

22 Dawning of Federal Power  Interstate Commerce Commission Act, 1887  Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 1890  Federal Bankruptcy Act, 1898  Pure Food and Drug Act, 1906  Meat Inspection Act, 1906  Theodore Roosevelt’s New Nationalism, 1910  Federal Reserve Act, 1913  Woodrow Wilson’s New Freedom, 1913  Clayton Anti-Trust Act, 1914  Interstate Commerce Commission Act, 1887  Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 1890  Federal Bankruptcy Act, 1898  Pure Food and Drug Act, 1906  Meat Inspection Act, 1906  Theodore Roosevelt’s New Nationalism, 1910  Federal Reserve Act, 1913  Woodrow Wilson’s New Freedom, 1913  Clayton Anti-Trust Act, 1914

23 Power-Booster Amendments  Sixteenth Amendment, 1913 authorized federal income tax  Seventeenth Amendment, 1913 provided for election of U.S. senators by voters in each state  Sixteenth Amendment, 1913 authorized federal income tax  Seventeenth Amendment, 1913 provided for election of U.S. senators by voters in each state

24 Creeping Cooperative Federalism  Morrill Act, 1862 (land grants for colleges)  Weeks Act, 1911 (forest-fire prevention)  Smith-Lever Act, 1914 (agricultural extension)  Federal-Aid Road Act, 1916 (highway construction)  Smith-Hughes Act, 1917 (teachers’ salaries for vocational education)  Fess-Kenyon Act, 1920 (vocational rehabilitation for disabled veterans)  Sheppard-Towner Act, 1921 (expectant mothers and infants)  Morrill Act, 1862 (land grants for colleges)  Weeks Act, 1911 (forest-fire prevention)  Smith-Lever Act, 1914 (agricultural extension)  Federal-Aid Road Act, 1916 (highway construction)  Smith-Hughes Act, 1917 (teachers’ salaries for vocational education)  Fess-Kenyon Act, 1920 (vocational rehabilitation for disabled veterans)  Sheppard-Towner Act, 1921 (expectant mothers and infants)

25 FDR’s New Deal Era  Vast expansion of federal power into private-sector economy  Rise of social welfare as federal responsibility  Few intrusions into traditional prerogatives of state and local governments  Vast expansion of federal power into private-sector economy  Rise of social welfare as federal responsibility  Few intrusions into traditional prerogatives of state and local governments

26 New Deal Cooperation  Increased federal aid  Little federal supervision  Maintenance of dual regulation and taxation of banking, securities, communications, public utilities, and others  Continuance of state regulation of insurance  Federal-law exceptions for state and local governments (e.g., Social Security Act of 1935 and Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938)  Increased federal aid  Little federal supervision  Maintenance of dual regulation and taxation of banking, securities, communications, public utilities, and others  Continuance of state regulation of insurance  Federal-law exceptions for state and local governments (e.g., Social Security Act of 1935 and Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938)

27 Historic Reversals  Reversal of fiscal fortunes: federal spending as percent of all own-source government spending increased from 25% in 1929 to 51% by 1939 and 70% by 1959; local share dropped from 54% in 1929 to 28% in 1939 and 16% in 1959; state share was 21% in both 1929 and 1939 but only 14% by  Tenth Amendment “states but a truism” United States v. Darby, 1940  Reversal of fiscal fortunes: federal spending as percent of all own-source government spending increased from 25% in 1929 to 51% by 1939 and 70% by 1959; local share dropped from 54% in 1929 to 28% in 1939 and 16% in 1959; state share was 21% in both 1929 and 1939 but only 14% by  Tenth Amendment “states but a truism” United States v. Darby, 1940

28 Cooperative Federalism,  Virtually all public functions are shared, not divided, federal-state-local responsibilities  Power is distributed in a non-centralized (rather than decentralized) manner, making it nearly impossible to identify a single locus of decision-making power  Federalism is not a zero-sum game; increased federal power does not necessarily decrease state powers  Chaotic non-centralized political parties mediate conflict and facilitate systemic IGR consent  IGR bargaining and negotiation produce systemic cooperation and collaboration that minimizes IGR coercion  Federal, state, and local officials are colleagues, not adversaries  “the American system is … one government serving one people.”  Virtually all public functions are shared, not divided, federal-state-local responsibilities  Power is distributed in a non-centralized (rather than decentralized) manner, making it nearly impossible to identify a single locus of decision-making power  Federalism is not a zero-sum game; increased federal power does not necessarily decrease state powers  Chaotic non-centralized political parties mediate conflict and facilitate systemic IGR consent  IGR bargaining and negotiation produce systemic cooperation and collaboration that minimizes IGR coercion  Federal, state, and local officials are colleagues, not adversaries  “the American system is … one government serving one people.”

29 Coercive Federalism Contemporary era of federalism ( present) in which the major political, fiscal, statutory, regulatory, and judicial practices entail centralization, state and local cooptation, and the imposition of many federal dictates on state and local governments.

30 Rise of Coercive Federalism During the Late 1960s  Civil Rights Movement,  Nationalization of U.S. Bill of Rights,  Rise of national television by 1960s  Supreme Court’s “one person, one vote” reapportionment decisions, 1964  Triumph of primary elections over smoke- filled rooms after 1968  Democratic National Convention, 1968  Collapse of traditional confederated party system,  Civil Rights Movement,  Nationalization of U.S. Bill of Rights,  Rise of national television by 1960s  Supreme Court’s “one person, one vote” reapportionment decisions, 1964  Triumph of primary elections over smoke- filled rooms after 1968  Democratic National Convention, 1968  Collapse of traditional confederated party system,

31 Rise of Coercive Federalism During Late 1960s  Rise of social movements demanding nationwide equality and national policies to remedy spillovers  Rise of institutional lobbying in Washington, D.C.  Rise of state and local public employee unions and associations  Interstate mobility and massive migrations  Collapse of bicommunal federalism,  Rise of social movements demanding nationwide equality and national policies to remedy spillovers  Rise of institutional lobbying in Washington, D.C.  Rise of state and local public employee unions and associations  Interstate mobility and massive migrations  Collapse of bicommunal federalism,

32 Confederate States of America Source: accessed July 1, States under CSA control States and territories claimed by CSA without formal secession and/or control

33 Official Support for Coercive Federalism  Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the White House  Democrats and Republicans in state legislatures, governors’ mansions, county courthouses, city and town halls, and school boards  Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the White House  Democrats and Republicans in state legislatures, governors’ mansions, county courthouses, city and town halls, and school boards

34 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Federal Aid  Shift of federal aid from places to persons Federal Aid  Shift of federal aid from places to persons

35 Summary Comparison of Total Outlays for Grants to State and Local Governments, * are estimated. Source: Executive Office of the President, The Budget for Fiscal Year 2011, Historical Tables (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2010), pp

36 Federal Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments for Persons and Places as Percentages of Total Grants, * are estimated. Source: Executive Office of the President, The Budget for Fiscal Year 2011, Historical Tables (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2010), pp

37 Consequences of Federal Aid Shift from Places to Persons  Place-based aid for infrastructure, economic development, education, criminal justice, government administration, etc. has declined steeply  State budgets have been locked into programs involving rising federal regulation and escalating state matching costs (e.g., Medicaid)  Federal aid to local governments has declined significantly  Place-based aid for infrastructure, economic development, education, criminal justice, government administration, etc. has declined steeply  State budgets have been locked into programs involving rising federal regulation and escalating state matching costs (e.g., Medicaid)  Federal aid to local governments has declined significantly

38 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Federal Aid  Shift of federal aid from places to persons  Intrusive conditions of aid (i.e., crossover and crosscutting conditions)  Increased earmarking Federal Aid  Shift of federal aid from places to persons  Intrusive conditions of aid (i.e., crossover and crosscutting conditions)  Increased earmarking

39 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Preemption Under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, Para 2), a federal law prevails over any conflicting state laws. Preemption Under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, Para 2), a federal law prevails over any conflicting state laws.

40 Types of Preemption 1. Explicit/Express: Congress states explicitly in a statute that it intends to preempt incompatible state laws. 2. Implied: The courts or federal agencies assume preemption if [a] a federal law and a state law are in direct conflict or [b] a state law hinders the achievement of a federal-law objective. 1. Explicit/Express: Congress states explicitly in a statute that it intends to preempt incompatible state laws. 2. Implied: The courts or federal agencies assume preemption if [a] a federal law and a state law are in direct conflict or [b] a state law hinders the achievement of a federal-law objective.

41 Degrees of Preemption 1. Total (or Occupy-the-Field) Preemption prohibits state action in the field occupied by federal law. 2. Partial Preemption allows state action, usually equal to or greater than the regulatory standard set by federal law. 1. Total (or Occupy-the-Field) Preemption prohibits state action in the field occupied by federal law. 2. Partial Preemption allows state action, usually equal to or greater than the regulatory standard set by federal law.

42 Source: U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Federal Statutory Preemption of State and Local Authority: History, Inventory, and Issues. Washington, DC: ACIR, September 1992.

43 Source: U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Federal Statutory Preemption of State and Local Authority: History, Inventory, and Issues. Washington, DC: ACIR, September 1992 and National Academy of Public Administration, Beyond Preemption. Washington, DC: NAPA, May 2006.

44 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Mandates Direct federal orders requiring state or local governments to execute federal policy rules under pain of possible civil or criminal penalties. Mandates Direct federal orders requiring state or local governments to execute federal policy rules under pain of possible civil or criminal penalties.

45 Growth of Mandates  1enacted in 1931  1enacted in 1940  0enacted  9enacted  29enacted  27enacted  1enacted in 1931  1enacted in 1940  0enacted  9enacted  29enacted  27enacted

46 Mandate Relief  Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 1995 Eleven mandates exceeding UMRA threshold enacted since 1995 UMRA does not apply to some policies such as civil rights  Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 1995 Eleven mandates exceeding UMRA threshold enacted since 1995 UMRA does not apply to some policies such as civil rights

47 Conditional Mandates  REAL ID Act, 2005 State participation is voluntary and federal aid is provided But, if a state does not participate, its residents’ driver’s licenses will be invalid for any federal- government purpose, such as boarding an airplane, riding Amtrak, applying for federal benefits (e.g., Medicaid and Medicare), opening a bank account, buying a firearm, and entering a federal building.  REAL ID Act, 2005 State participation is voluntary and federal aid is provided But, if a state does not participate, its residents’ driver’s licenses will be invalid for any federal- government purpose, such as boarding an airplane, riding Amtrak, applying for federal benefits (e.g., Medicaid and Medicare), opening a bank account, buying a firearm, and entering a federal building.

48 Federal Rules Affecting State and Local Governments, 1994–2007 Source: Clyde Wayne Crews, Jr., “Ten Thousand Commandments: An Annual Snapshot of the Federal Regulatory State” (Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2008), p. 24. Accessed July 18, 2008, Data compiled from “The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions,” Federal Register, various years’ editions; and from online edition at

49 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Taxation  Tax Reform Act of 1986: elimination of state sales tax deduction and limits on tax-exempt private-activity bonds  Quill Corp v. North Dakota, 1992  Internet Tax Non-Discrimination Act, 2007  Lack of concern about federal tax-code changes on state and local taxes  Presumption that Congress has constitutional authority to levy a sales tax or VAT Taxation  Tax Reform Act of 1986: elimination of state sales tax deduction and limits on tax-exempt private-activity bonds  Quill Corp v. North Dakota, 1992  Internet Tax Non-Discrimination Act, 2007  Lack of concern about federal tax-code changes on state and local taxes  Presumption that Congress has constitutional authority to levy a sales tax or VAT

50 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Demise of Federal IGR Institutions  Dismantling of OMB IGR Office in early 1980s  Decline of U.S. Senate and House IGR committees  Dismantling of IGR unit in GAO in early 1990s  Death of U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations ( )  Politicization of agency IGR offices Demise of Federal IGR Institutions  Dismantling of OMB IGR Office in early 1980s  Decline of U.S. Senate and House IGR committees  Dismantling of IGR unit in GAO in early 1990s  Death of U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations ( )  Politicization of agency IGR offices

51 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Decline of Political IGR Cooperation  Decline of willingness of elected and politically appointed federal officials to cooperate regularly with elected state and local officials as co-equal representatives of the people  Washington, D.C., view of state and local governments as merely lobbyists  NGA is just “another liberal lobbying group” (Americans for Tax Reform)  Senator Carl Levin (D-MI): “There is no political capital in intergovernmental relations” Decline of Political IGR Cooperation  Decline of willingness of elected and politically appointed federal officials to cooperate regularly with elected state and local officials as co-equal representatives of the people  Washington, D.C., view of state and local governments as merely lobbyists  NGA is just “another liberal lobbying group” (Americans for Tax Reform)  Senator Carl Levin (D-MI): “There is no political capital in intergovernmental relations” 1989.

52 Characteristics of Coercive Federalism Federalization of Criminal Law

53 Crimes in the U.S. Constitution … the Constitution of the United States … delegated to Congress a power to punish [1] treason, [2] counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, [3] piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and [4] offenses against the laws of nations ….” Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions, 1798 … the Constitution of the United States … delegated to Congress a power to punish [1] treason, [2] counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, [3] piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and [4] offenses against the laws of nations ….” Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions, 1798

54 Source: John S. Baker, Jr., “Revisiting the Explosive Growth of Federal Crimes,” Legal Memorandum 26 (Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation, June 16, 2008):

55 Table 1A Is your state/province treated with the respect it deserves in the federal system of government? Yes No All Canadian Respondents45.4%48.0%43.1%47.9%46.7%50.3% All U.S. Respondents Canadian Regions Atlantic Provinces Quebec Ontario Manitoba/Saskatchewan Alberta British Columbia Canadian Federal Political Parties Alliance Bloc Quebecois Conservative Green and Others Liberal New Democratic PC Sources: Author Reference Deleted 2002; Author Reference Deleted 2005; Author Reference Deleted 2008; and authors’ 2009 survey. Note: Percents exclude “Don’t know” and “No Answer” responses.

56 Table 1B Is your state/province treated with the respect it deserves in the federal system of government? Yes No All Canadian Respondents45.4%48.0%43.1%47.9%46.7%50.3% All U.S. Respondents U.S. Regions New England Mid-Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic East South Central West South Central Mountain Pacific Sources: Author Reference Deleted 2002; Author Reference Deleted 2005; Author Reference Deleted 2008; and authors’ 2009 survey. Note: Percents exclude “Don’t know” and “No Answer” responses

57 Table 2 Trust and confidence in the various orders of government, Canada United States Mexico Federal Government Great Deal/ Fair 46.5% 37.0% 51.5% 48.9% 68.0% 66.4% 53.1% 50.0% 42.6% 38.3% Little/None State/Provincial Governments Great Deal/ Fair Little/None Local Governments Great Deal/ Fair Little/None Note: Percents do not add to 100 due to exclusion of “Don’t Know” and “No Answer” responses.

58 Most for Money Canada United States Mexico Federal 21.7% 19.0% 23.8% 32.0% 32.6% 29.0% 38.0% Province/State Local None DK/NA Note: In 2004 and 2009 “none” and “Don’t know” responses were combined. Least for Money Canada United States Mexico Federal Province/State Local All of the Above None DK/NA Note: “all of the above” was not a response option in 2007 Table 3 From which level of government do you feel you get the most/least for your money?

59 Table 4 Which level of government has too much power / needs more power today? Canada United States Mexico Has Too Much Power Federal56.2% 47.7% 50.6%51.7% 66.1% 60.1%65.4%54.9% Province/State Local All of the Above None of the Above Don’t Know/NA Canada United StatesMexico Needs More Power Federal14.0% 10.5% 10.9% 8.2% 19.6% Province/State Local All of the Above None of the Above Don’t Know/NA Sources: Author Reference Deleted et al. 2003; Author Reference Deleted 2008; and authors’ 2009 survey.

60 Table 5A Responses to the federalism culture questions and scale of federal culture Canada MexicoUnited States A federal form of government is preferable. Strongly Agree 28.0% 24.7% 18.0%16.6% 43.3%27.2% Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree DK/NA Totals Sig=.000; cc= A country in which everyone speaks the same language is preferable. Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree DK/NA Totals Sig=.000; cc= Having a strong leader in government is preferable. Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree `16.8 DK/NA Totals Sig=.000; cc=.217

61 Table 5B Responses to the federalism culture questions and scale of federal culture Canada MexicoUnited States When making decisions, government is better off limiting discussion. Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree DK/NA Totals Scale of Federalism Attitudes based on “strong” or “somewhat” pro-federalism responses to the three attitudinal questions asked above each year. 0 (least pro-federal) 4.6% 5.1% 10.8% 6.3% 5.1% 6.5% (most pro-federal) Mean Score Sig=.000; cc=.126


Download ppt "American Federalism Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania Seeming Paradoxes? John Kincaid Lafayette College Easton, Pennsylvania."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google