1.) Federalism is a system of government in which power is divided between centralgovernment and sub divisional government. With a unitary system, the national governmenthas ultimate power and can override decisions made by lower levels of government. With aconfederal system, the central government has no power to make laws unless the memberssupport the laws. Federalism is the silver lining between the two where authority is dividedbetween central and regional government.Group 3: #2 Advantages of Federalism: Distributed decision making Is effective because it promotes the development of many subcultures within the state. Allows states to have “trials” with new policies and processes to see if it would be food for the entire nation to follow. i.e. Arizona taxes Limits the influence of any one group or set of interest.Disadvantages of Federalism Powerful states controlled by minority interests can limit progress. *or undermines the rights of minority groups -an example of this is the 1% wealthy group in America being able to campaign and lobby for interests that help them, what about the other 99%? There can be Inequities across states in terms of policies and spending on services like education or crime prevention. *Example: gay marriage & full faith. Just because you have a same-sex married in Massachusetts does not mean Georgia has to honor that same-sex marriage.Group 3: #3Sources of Federalism in the constitution- “federal system” Is not found in the U.S. constitution INSTEAD: congress set out differet types ofpowers1. Powers of the national government: Article 1 - Expressed and Implied Powers -examples of powers of National Government: Coining $, uniform naturalization laws, power to declare war with 2/3 vote, admitting new states, etc. -Elastic Clause: “Make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers” (implied powers) Case:*McCulloch vs. Maryland2. Powers of the States: 10th amendment -“Powers not delegated to the U.S. by the constitution (nor prohibited by the states)are reserved to the states, or people.3. Prohibited Powers - National government may not impose taxes on goods sold to other countries (exports)- Any power not granted to the federal government by the constitution is prohibited to it. - No STATE is allowed to enter into a treaty on its own with another country.So that the national government would not become too powerful, vertical checks and alances were installedDivided national government into three brancheslegislative, executive, judicial*verticle checks and balances: involve relationships between the states and the national government*Horizontal checks and balances: Branches of government on the same level-either national or state can check one anotherthe founders made it so that no one branch or level of government had too much power with the instalment of vertical and horizontal checks and balances.Group 3: #44. Before the results of the Marshall court’s decisions, the federal government’s powers came from what was explicitly stated in the Constitution. However, after the Marshall court’s decision on McCulloch v. Maryland, implied powers were set up for the federal government under the necessary and proper clause of the Constitution. This means the federal government has power to create laws in order to carry out their powers. The Supreme Court also has power to stop the federal government from going too far with their enumerated/implied powers. Today, practically every expressed power of the national government has been expanded in one way or another by use of the necessary and proper clause. Through Marshall’s ruling on Gibbons v. Ogden, the power of regulating intrastate commerce was exclusively a national power. This power comes under the commerce clause of the Constitution in which Congress is given the power to regulate trade among the states and with foreign countries. Marshall’s expansive interpretation of the commerce clause inGibbons v. Ogden allowed the national government to exercise increasing authority over all areas of economic affairs throughout the land. After the Civil War, dual federalism was the prevailing model in the US. This doctrine emphasizes a distinction between federal and state spheres of government authority. In other words, each of the states and the federal government remain supreme within their own spheres. Roosevelt’s New Deal signaled the rise of cooperative federalism, a doctrine in which the states and the national government cooperate in solving complex common problems. The pattern of national-state relationships during these years created a new metaphor for federalism-that of a marble cake. Unlike a layer cake, in a marble cake the two types of cake are intermingled, and any bite contains cake of both flavors. During the Civil Rights period of the 1960’s-1970’s, the evolving pattern of national-state-local government relationships yielded picket-fence federalism. This is a model of federalism in which specific programs and policies (depicted as vertical pickets in a picket fence) involve all levels in government-national, state, and local (depicted by the horizontal boards in a picket fence). Officials at each level of government work together to promote and develop the policy represented by each picket. By 1985, categorical grants (federal grants to states or local governments that are for specific programs or projects) amounted to more than $100 billion per year in the US. For the fiscal year 2009 the national government gave an estimated $253 billion to the states and local governments through federal grants. Before the 1960’s, most categorical grants by the national government were formula grants-they fund state programs using a formula based on such as the state’s needs, population, or willingness to come up with matching funds. Beginning in the 1960’s, the national government began increasingly to offer program grants-these require states to apply for grants for specific programs. Program grants give the national government much greater degree of control over state activities than formula grants. These grants often have more requirements set by the national government that must be met by the states. Blockgrants lessen the restrictions on federal grants given to state and local governments by groupingseveral