3. FederalismAmerican-Style FederalismPowerPoint PresentationAmerican-Style Federalism: Evolving Definitions of FederalismSlide 5Federalism and the ConstitutionFederalism and the Constitution: Transformation of the SenateFederalism and the Constitution: Constitutional Provisions Governing FederalismFederalism and the Constitution: Interpreting the Constitutional ProvisionsThe Paths to NationalizationThe Paths to Nationalization: Historic Transfers of Policy to WashingtonThe Paths to Nationalization: Nationalization: The Solution to States’ Collective DilemmasThe Paths to Nationalization: The Political Logic of NationalizationModern Federalism: The National Government’s Advantage in the CourtsModern FederalismModern Federalism: Carrots As Federal Grants to the StatesModern Federalism: The Stick As Unfunded MandatesEvolving Federalism: A Byproduct of National Policy3. FederalismAmerican-Style Federalism•Federal System–authority divided between two or more distinct levels of government–United States consists of federal and state levels•Hybrid arrangement that mixes elements of a confederation and a unitary system.•Confederation: lower-level government has primary authority•Unitary system: national government monopolizes constitutional authorityAmerican-Style Federalism:Evolving Definitions of Federalism•Dual federalism: state governments and the national government preside over “spheres of sovereignty” •Cooperative federalism: state governments and national government jointly supply services to the peopleAmerican-Style Federalism:Evolving Definitions of FederalismFederalism and the Constitution•Expansion of national authority–Transformation of Senate–Institutional rules reserving rights to states•Who decides expansion is legitimate?•Nationalization allowed by Constitution by granting federal government ultimate power to determine (within certain bounds) the extent of its authority over statesFederalism and the Constitution:Transformation of the Senate•Equal representation for states regardless of population•Senate members originally selected by state legislatures•17th Amendment (1913) mandated direct, popular election of senators removing ties to state legislatorsFederalism and the Constitution:Constitutional Provisions Governing FederalismFederalism and the Constitution:Interpreting the Constitutional Provisions•The Supreme Court resolves conflicts between federal and state governments and, in the process, creates powerful precedents: –McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) –Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)–Gitlow v. New York (1925)–Near v. Minnesota (1931)–Palko v. Connecticut (1937)–Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)–Roe v. Wade (1973)The Paths to Nationalization•Nationalization of public policy–The nationalization of public policy was propelled by a rationale, or logic, of collective action.–Certain programs outstrip state resources.–States sometimes solicit federal intervention when unable to solve problems by working together individually.–National majorities increasingly insisted on federal involvement in what were formerly considered state and local matters.The Paths to Nationalization: Historic Transfers of Policy to Washington•Roosevelt’s New Deal (1930s)–Comprehensive set of economic regulations and relief programs intended to fight the Great Depression–Franklin D. Roosevelt invoked the Commerce Clause•Johnson’s Great Society (1960s)–War on Poverty as part of the Lyndon Johnson administration’s Great Society agenda–More than a hundred new programs, the largest of which was Medicaid–Subsidized state programs and implemented national goalsThe Paths to Nationalization:Nationalization: The Solution to States’ Collective Dilemmas•Collective action dilemmas may prompt states to ask Washington for help.–coordination problems–reneging and shirking–cutthroat competition–policy innovationThe Paths to Nationalization:The Political Logic of Nationalization•Policy proposers often strategically shift policy to national government rather than states–Difficult to lobby/persuade 50 separate state legislatures–Congress can be more efficient, since single federal law can change policy in all 50 states at once–Avoid burdensome and varied regulations–The national government may be more receptive to change than local community (eg. civil rights)—although opposite can also occurModern Federalism: The National Government’s Advantage in the Courts •Current constitutional litigation over federalism generally concerns direct efforts by the federal government to regulate activities of state and local governments and their employees•Recently the Supreme Court has begun to take a more circumspect view of federal authority, seeking to preserve some semblance of state independenceModern Federalism•Preemption legislation = Federal laws that assert the national government’s prerogative to control public policy in a particular area –Owes its existence to the supremacy clause–Accounts for a small portion of the impact of nationalization on federal-state relations •Carrot and stick–Financial inducements; regulation and mandatesModern Federalism: Carrots As Federal Grants to the States•Block grants–state governments receive a specific amount of money to spend for some purpose (same across states)–state government can expand the program, but must pay the additional costs–little incentive to control costs, but a disincentive to do more •Matching grants –federal government matches money spent by states in a policy area, generally between a 1:1 and 1:4 ratio–more likely to lead to program expansion–allow federal government to equalize living conditions across states (since people move and incentivizes higher state spending and redistribution)Modern Federalism:The Stick As Unfunded Mandates•States are required to administer policies to which they may object–States may be asked to pay for the administration of the policies–Crosscutting requirements= statutes applying rules and guidelines to array of federally subsidized state programs–Crossover sanctions= stipulations that a state must adhere to guidelines of a program in order to remain eligible for full federal funding in an unrelated program–Direct orders = requirements that can be enforced by legal and civil penalties.Evolving Federalism:A Byproduct of National Policy•Federal-state relations dramatically transformed