AP United States Government and Politics Chapter 3: Federalism AP United States Government and Politics

Federalism Definition: system in which the national government shares power with local governments States have a specially protected existence and authority (not merely junior partners) The implementation and funding of federal decisions depends upon state and local government The impact of federalism is widespread (roads, crime, civil liberties, civil rights)

Structure Good or Bad? Confusion about responsibility for particular functions can have dire consequences Hurricane Katrina and Rita led to fighting between federal, state, and local officials First-responders and disaster relief workers are nongovernmental, volunteers Some governmental agencies made delivery of aid harder

The Founding A bold, new plan to protect personal liberty Founders believed that neither national nor state government would have authority over the other because power derives from the people, who shift their support New plan had no historical precedent Tenth Amendment was added as an afterthought, to define the power of states

The Founding Elastic language in Article I: necessary and proper Precise definitions of powers politically impossible because of competing interests, such as commerce Hence vague language – “necessary and proper” Hamilton’s view: national supremacy because Constitution supreme law Jefferson’s view: states’ rights with people ultimate sovereign

Debate on Meaning of Federalism The Supreme Court speaks Hamiltonian position espoused by Marshall McCulloch v. Maryland settled two questions* Could Congress charter a national bank? (yes, because “necessary and proper”) Could states tax such a bank? (no, because national powers supreme) Later battles Federal government cannot tax state bank Nullification doctrine let to Civil War: states void federal laws they deem in conflict with Constitution

Dual Federalism Both national and state governments supreme in their own spheres Hence interstate versus intrastate commerce

State Sovereignty Mistake today to think dual federalism entirely dead Supreme Court has limited the use of the commerce clause New life has been given to the Eleventh Amendment Although not all recent Supreme Court decisions support greater state sovereignty Constitutional basis of state and local government New debates have resurrected notion of state police powers State constitutions tend to be more detailed and expansive Many state constitutions open door to direct democracy: 1) initiative 2) referendum 3) recall Existence of states guaranteed while local governments exist at pleasure of states

Federal-State Relations: Grants-in-Aid Grants show how political realities modify legal authority Began before the Constitution with “land grant colleges,” various cash grants to states Dramatically increased in scope in the twentieth century Were attractive for various reasons Huge surpluses in the 1880s Federal income tax was created Federal management of money and the power to print more at will “Free” money for state officials Required broad congressional coalitions Examples: federal funds for increased public safety post-September 11 Example: Homeland Security grants and fair share formulas

Federal-State Relations: The Intergovernmental Lobby Hundreds of state, local officials lobby in Washington Federal agencies have staff members that provide information, technical assistance, and financial support to state and local organizations Purpose: to get more federal money with fewer strings

Federal-State Relations: Categorical Grants vs. Revenue Sharing Categorical grants for specific purposes often require local matching funds Block grants devoted to general purposes with few restrictions Revenue sharing requires no matching funds and provides freedom in how to spend Distributed by statistical formula Ended in 1986

Federal-State Relations: Rivalry Among the States Increased competition a result of increased dependency Snowbelt (Frostbelt) versus Sunbelt state Difficulty telling where funds spend Difficulty connecting funds to growth rates Focus on formulas and their impact Census takes monumental importance

Mandates Most concern civil rights and environmental protection Administrative and financial problems often result Federal-state disputes, fueling the friction Some mandates are not adequately funded Explaining the variation in funding Number high in environmental funding, low in education policy and moderate in health care Lower rates of spending are associated with more mandates Waivers are more easily obtained in some policy areas than others

Conditions of Aid Received by states voluntarily, at least in theory Financial dependence blurs the theory Civil rights generally the focus of most important conditions in the 1960s, a proliferation has continued since the 1970s Conditions range from specific to general The states and federal government disagree about the costs and benefits of rules Different demands result in complex bargaining among government officials Bargains originally favored local officials Emergence of Washington’s needs over local needs

A Devolution Revolution? Efforts of the Reagan Administration Consolidation of categorical grants into block grants Less money sent to the states, but with fewer strings States started spending more of their own money as well Republican efforts in the 1990s Attempt to cut government spending, roll back federal regulations and shift important functions back to the states Reform of AFDC Devolution An old idea led from a new direction, Congress Spending was considered a form of constituency service

A Devolution Revolution? Impact of Devolution – Where did it occur? Dramatic decrease in welfare rolls Second order devolution Third order devolution Congressional preemption Express preemption Implied preemption