The Evolution of State and Local Government
If you ask most people today what level of government they have the most involvement with and that impacts their lives the most, they will undoubtedly respond with, “the State and local governments”; this is true for most Americans. From police and fire protection, to transportation, to conducting business, the citizens of America depend on their State and local governments to respond to their increasing needs. With this increase in demands, are we asking too much of our officials and will they be able to continue to respond with local, innovative ideas or will they grow into a mega-bureaucracy with stifling inflexibility? This paper will look at State and local government’s history, point out key legislation that made it what it is today and look at what the future may hold for local leaders.
The original thirteen colonies under British charters set the foundation of state government for the United States. The independent systems of self-government were based on the “Rights of Englishmen”, where most white men could vote (Swindler, 1976). Colonists believed they should not be taxed without representation in Parliament. The Provincial Congresses were formed with elected representatives leading the formation of the Continental Congress.
Under the Articles of Confederation, the thirteen colonies, or states, had a tremendous amount of control over their affairs, which many people wanted. Conversely, there were also many people who insisted on a strong national government that limited power to the colonies. A compromise was reached by the Founders of the new nation and what is known as the “federal system” was created which balanced the power between the federal, state and local gover...
... middle of paper ...
...htm
Hall, Kermit L. "State Sovereignty and States' Rights." The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. 2005. Encyclopedia.com. http://www.encyclopedia.com.
Kearney, A., & Bowman, R. (2010). Evolution of Devolution. Retrieved March 25, 2011, from Cengage Learning: college.cengage.com/.../evolution_devolution/index.html
Reagan, R. (1987). Executive Order 12612 Federalism-Reagan. Retrieved April 9, 2011, from www.uhuh.com: www.uhuh.com/laws/eo12612.htm
Swindler, William F., May1976. Rights of Englishmen since 1776: Some Anglo-American Notes; 124 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1083 Volume 124 Number 5.
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/pnlr124&div=44&id=&page=
Whitehouse. (2011). State & Local Government. Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Whitehouse.gov: http://www.whitehouse.gov/our-government/state-local-government
The fourth chapter of City Politics by Dennis R. Judd & Todd Swanstrom covers the rise of "Reform Politics" with many local governments during the first half of the 1900s as a way to combat the entrenched political machines that took control of many large city governments in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Over the course of the chapter, Judd & Swanstrom quickly cover the history of the "reform movement" with different examples of how the reform movement affected city politics in different areas.
First of all, each of the different colonies’ founders all expressed sentiments to establish a solid and uncorrupt government. One that would honor God. This government would be made up of a Governor, and a general Assembly and/or provincial Council where most political and judicial decisions would be made and agreed on together. In the Mayflower Compact, Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, and the Frame of Government of Pennsylvania, men were given the right to vote and choose the officials and representatives who would have a place in the government. These first colonies also promised the people that justice would be restored, it would not be sold, or withheld.
When the colonies were being formed, many colonists came from England to escape the restrictions placed upon them by the crown. Britain had laws for regulating trade and collecting taxes, but they were generally not enforced. The colonists had gotten used to being able to govern themselves. However, Britain sooned changed it’s colonial policy because of the piling debt due to four wars the British got into with the French and the Spanish. The most notable of these, the French and Indian War (or the Seven Years’ War), had immediate effects on the relationship between the colonies and Great Britain, leading to the concept of no taxation without representation becoming the motivating force for the American revolutionary movement and a great symbol for democracy amongst the colonies, as Britain tried to tighten their hold on the colonies through various acts and measures.
The thirteen American colonies were under the British control until they declared their independence from British in 1776. A year after the declaration of independence, the continental congress established the Article Of Confederation, which was the first constitution in the United States. According to manythings.org, “During that war, the colonies were united by an agreement called the Articles of Confederation”. It was later ratified in 1781, but it had many negatives because it was very weak. According to manythings.org, the Articles Of Confederation did not: organize a central government, create courts or decide laws, nor provide an executive to carry out the laws, and all it did was just create a Congress. This congress was very useless
In this political philosophy the colonies had originally made a charter with the king who set a custom that he was to provide for the defense of the colonially while each colony maintained the right to legislative self-rule. Jefferson would state, “the addition of new states to the British Empire has produced an addition of new, and sometimes opposite interests. It is now therefore, the great office of his majesty to resume the exercise of his negative power, and to prevent the passage of laws by any one legislature of the empire, which might bear injuriously on the right and interest of another” (A Warning to the King: Thomas Jefferson, “A Summary View of the Rights of British-America”, Green, p. 234). In other words, for Americans to preserve the true ancient British constitution, it was vital to establish that parliament did not have authority over them, because they could never be required to give up actual popular consent or governance in the British Parliament. Thomas Hutchinson stated this idea clear, “The king might retain the executive power and also his share of the legislative without any abridgement of our rights as Englishmen, the Parliament could not retain their legislative power without depriving them of those rights, for after removal they could no longer be represented, and their sovereign, sensible of this charter or commissions made provision in every colon for legislature
Self-governance was a primary idea of the settlers in North America. Once English settlers began to come to the new world in the 1600s, they knew they needed to have their own freedom for themselves, after all that is why they left Great Britain in many cases. Self-governance is most notable in the earliest form of the Mayflower Compact in 1620 for Virginia. Great Britain began to deteriorate the self-governing nature of the colonies in the mid-1700s through various acts it deemed to be necessary. The enforcement of these acts caused the colonists to be unhappy with the actions Great Britain was taking and so the phrase “taxation without representation is tyranny” came.
The Articles of Confederation set up a government that consisted of a one house body of delegates, with each state having a single vote, acting collectively, could make decisions on certain issues that affected all states. There was no president or judiciary so any decision required nine of the thirteen states’ votes. At this point in time the United States of America ... ... middle of paper ... ... o consider the charms of liberty as imaginary and delusive.”
Following the failure of the Articles of Confederation, a debate arose discussing how a centralized government ought to be organized. The prevailing opinion ultimately belonged to the Federalists, whose philosophy was famously outlined in The Federalist Papers. Recognizing that in a free nation, man would naturally divide himself into factions, they chose not to remedy this problem by stopping it at its source; instead, they would limit its effects by placing strict structural safeguards within the government's framework. The Federalists defined a facti...
To define the terminology of federalism to a simplistic way is the sharing of sovereignty between the national government and the local government. It is often described as the dual sovereignty of governments between the national and the local to exert power in the political system. In the US it is often been justified as one of the first to introduce federalism by the ‘founding fathers’ which were developed in order to escape from the overpowered central government. However, federalism in the United States is hitherto uncertain where the power lies in the contemporary political system. In this essay I will outline and explain how power relationship alternates between states and federal government. Moreover I will also discuss my perspective by weighing the evidence based upon resources. Based on these resources, it will aid me to evaluate the recent development in the federal-state relationship.
The Colonies were excited about having won their independence in 1783 with the signing of the Treaty of Paris, but they still had to be able to create their own system of government which they thought would create a strong government which would not have an overpowering central government as they thought Great Britain had had. With this was the creation of the Articles of Confederation. These articles were meant to create strong local and state governments while not granting any power to the central government with the idea that it could not have any power over the states. The states were allowed to conduct their own diplomacy, or war, from nation to nation or even from state to state. States were allowed to create their own currency and put heavy import taxes on goods from other states. The federal government had no independent executive, nor could it levy taxes on any part of the states. It could not create or maintain a militia; this duty was left to the states. All decisions had to be ratified by all thirteen colonies. In thought, this was a great idea because only the most popular decisions would be ratified and stronger states could not hurt the smaller states through majority rule. In practice it did not work very well because it could be thwarted by a single stubborn state.
By the late eighteenth century, America found itself independent from England; which was a welcomed change, but also brought with it, its own set of challenges. The newly formed National Government was acting under the Articles of Confederation, which established a “firm league of friendship” between the states, but did not give adequate power to run the country. To ensure the young nation could continue independently, Congress called for a Federal Convention to convene in Philadelphia to address the deficiencies in the Articles of Confederation. While the Congress only authorized the convention to revise and amend the Articles the delegates quickly set out to develop a whole new Constitution for the country. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the new Constitution called for a national Executive, which was strongly debated by the delegates. There were forces on both sides of the issue trying to shape the office to meet their ideology. The Federalists, who sought a strong central government, favored a strong National Executive which they believed would ensure the country’s safety from both internal and external threats. The Anti Federalists preferred to have more power in the hands of the states, and therefore tried to weaken the national Executive. Throughout the convention and even after, during the ratification debates, there was a fear, by some, that the newly created office of the president would be too powerful and lean too much toward monarchy.
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
After the Revolutionary war has concluded, the first 13 American states made a manifestation of a national government in order to generate order in the United States. The Articles of Confederation was the first set of rules permitted upon the states that supplied a foundation, and restrictions upon the government. Although some type of order was established within the nation, its main weakness was the lack of power in the central government. The arrangement of the Articles was based on a “loose confederation” meaning that the unity of the states as a nation was frail due to the ineffective central government. The 13 states individually had supreme power and self-government along with a weak central government made up of congress with a unicameral
In the early years of the eighteenth Century, the young United States of America were slowly adapting to the union and the way the country was governed. And just like the country, the governmental powers were starting to develop. Since the creation of the Constitution and due to the Connecticut Compromise, there is the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial Power. But the existence of those powers was not always that naturally. In these crucial times, the Judicial Power had problems controlling the other powers. It was a challenge for the Supreme Court to exercise the powers granted by the new Constitution. Federal Government was not generally appreciated and its formation also caused many disagreements and debates.
McDowell, Gary L. “The Explosion and Erosion of Rights.” In Bodenhamer, David J. and Ely, James W. The Bill of Rights in Modern America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2008. Print.