Federalism
Due to the immense power of our federal government, people often argue that it is too
powerful and should be lessened. Since the 1990’s there has been an effort to shift power
from the federal government to the states. States’ rights has been an issue since our
country was first founded, and even now we can’t seem to please everyone’s requests at
equal power.
This country was founded with the attempt to separate the federal government and
the state government, known as federalism. The goal of federalism is to divide the power
of state and federal governments, protect the rights of the state (through the 10th
amendment), prevent tyranny of the majority, and have a government that is close to its
people. Throughout the years, federalism turned into dual federalism where the state and
federal government were completely independent of each other and only shared a
dependency on the Constitution. What we have now is known as cooperative federalism.
In cooperative federalism, the national government has assumed even more power, it now
supersedes the states with its Supreme Court decisions/actions, Acts of Congress,
Executive Orders.
Some Americans fear that the federal government will become too strong and soon
the states will have no power. With the emergence of unfunded mandates, states were
required to follow the rules or they would be punished by the federal government. Some
unfunded mandates included the Clean Air Act, where each state must have a plan to
significantly lower the amount of pollution emitted, and the Americans with Disabilities
Act which required both public and private institutions to make their facilities accessible
for those with disabilities. The federal government did not provide any financial help when
an unfunded mandate was passed, the state government has to cut into its budget to avoid
its punishment. The federal government felt mandates were important because without
them people would abuse the rights of others and also because state budgets would not
Republicanism brought change to America, but called into question was the way this change was brought to America. James Madison through the Virginia Plan proposed a republic nation. The formation of the Republican opposition in the 1790’s continued the legacy of the American Revolution. Even though a republican government meant everyone in America would be under the same government it took away the “individual” freedom they fought for in the revolution but this government is representative of the people. Madison had a vision of an “extended republic” that would include everyone, however he would need a lot of support in order to get this republic. “Over the course of 1790’s, Jefferson and Madison would help turn their objections to Hamilton's
After the establishment of the constitution, the Federalist administrations faces many significant challenges when dealing with the economics of the United States; much of the country was divided over issues such as how to raise money, establishing a public credit system, how to pay the national debt, and whether or not a national bank should be established. Leaders like Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison came to represent the ideas of the people and as these ideas became more solid, debate and opposition rose. The Federalists saw multiple ways to resolve these issues, and the resolutions established that leadership in the United States would be successful.
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 early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining “positive” democracy. Both parties feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article, “The Fears of the Federalists”, the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen to be continually drive to “patriotic rebellion” as a way to voice their wants. Violence was not an uncommon practice of the era (the use of mob tactics was prevalent), but Federalists feared that if Democratic values were abused and unrestrained, the country would fall into anarchy.
The opposing argument serves as a perfect gateway to the topic of relationship between Federal and State government. In the United States, the Supremacy Clause serves...
In conclusion, the Constitution, may protect us from tyranny in this way.
The Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970, which established nationwide standards for air quality, is one such “unfounded mandate.” Although it is a federal law, states must pay the cost of implementation and enforcement.
concerning the success of such a system, depending on a person's outlook on the subject.
Ever since the founding of the country and particularly with the end of the American Civil War, power shifted away from the states and towards the national government.
Those who feared that the federal government would become too strong were assured by Madison in Federalist No. 14 that “in the first place it is to be remembered that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administrating laws…The subordinate governments, which can extend their care to all those other objects which can be separately provided for, will retain their due authority and activity”
Their claim was that parts of the law, exceeded federal authority. A claim the U.S Supreme Court showed that they disagreed with since it was decided in 2012 that the policy was indeed constitutional. Although the Supreme Court did clarify that while the individual mandate was constitutional, the expansion of Medicaid was not. Once again, Texas had lost a case. That did not stop the State from filing again, as in October of 2015, Texas, Kansas, and Louisiana sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Internal Revenue Service over the Affordable Care Act Fee, that requires for states to help financially support the federal health law that Obama passed. Texas chose to follow through with the law suit due to the fact that the state reimburses the companies that are contracted with Medicaid. The case is still pending in a Texas federal
The act was intended to provide health care coverage to those who were uninsured, which were more than 30 million Americans However, 26 states sued the national government over this law with the argument that it was an unconstitutional overreach of federal power (Hevron 2015). Nonetheless, the standardizing of these provisions across all 50 states were important to ensuring healthcare since millions of Americans would not have been able to get health insurance without national law. Through coercive federalism, the national government uses regulations and etc. to pressure the states to follow the national policy goals, where if they do not they may or may not lose their funds for things such as Medicaid if they do not expand it (Bianco and Canon, 2015). Obamacare has helped millions much more efficiently than each state passing a law that may be somewhat similar in
Federalism is a legal concept that is centered around the concept that law is best handled as a two layered responsibility. Federalism is also built on a belief that sharing power with the local government is key to a successful governance. According to the text book, “the United States was the first nation to adopt federalism as its governing framework” (pg83). The following are a few examples of some advantages, as well as disadvantages of Federalism.
constitution and it operates in a just way, if it does not do this its
American federalism is a system of dual-sovereignty between two levels of government. It is a constitutional feature that power is divided between the national government and the governments of the states, and that both are mutually dependant on the other for their existence while both being removed from any fear of dissolution from the other. However, “The Framers left many questions relating to federalism unanswered or unclear.” These questions include the amount of power established to each sovereign. Powers assigned to national governmental powers, such as the roles of Congress, are defined, but all that is mentioned of the state’s powers is the 10th Amendment.