Federalism
This policy analysis paper discusses the American federalism. In particular, the paper investigates why the framers feel that federalism was an essential feature of the American political system. There is no one single definition of federalism. It is considered to be a political concept whereby members are bound by the accord of a covenant. In this case, a governing representative leads the group. The term federalism can be alternatively used to describe a special type of government in which the constitution divides the sovereignty of the nation between certain constituent political units and a central governing authority such as provinces and states. The federalism system is majorly based on democratic rules or ideology and institutions. In this case, the power to govern the people is shared between the provincial, the national, and the state governments. It is this sharing of the power to govern that creates a federation. The term federalism may also refer to the beliefs and concepts of political parties.
As noted above, framers strongly believed that federalism was truly an essential part of American political system. Historically, American federalism started during early 1770s. Originally, in United States of America, federalism denoted a belief in stronger central governance body. However, this original idea of federalism has evolved over time. Initially during the drafting of the constitution of United States, the federalist crusaders supported a stronger central government. On the other hand, the antifederalists wanted a weaker central government. This is quite different from the modern concept of federalism in United States and other countries in Europe. The modern usage situates federalism in the center of a political spectrum between a unitary state and a confederacy. So many changes have taken place in the American political landscape. For instance, the power of the federal government has lately increased. This has created a much more unitary state than was intended by the American founding fathers of federalism (Gerston 54).
According to LaCroix (54), the founding fathers of federalism in United States of American were looking for limited powers of the state government. They also wanted a system of relatively weaker unitary state. They advocated for federalism to limit some powers of the national government such as the judiciary. Federalism was at the heart of American framers because they wanted division of authority and function in governance of the people. This is why they sort to divide the power of governance between the federal states and the national government. They also wanted to the American constitution to create certain limitations of power. It was thought that this would encourage good governance and embrace the principle of inclusiveness in leadership. Historically, American founding fathers envisioned a national government that is strong enough to perform its function but not become a threat to the national liberty. This is because United States of America was founded on the spirit of liberty. Liberty was very essential consideration to the populace then.
Federalism has significantly evolved throughout the American history. In fact, the modern American view of federalism is not the same as what their founding fathers beheld. In particular, the balance between the state government and national government has substantially changed at different points in time. For example, the role of national government was dramatically expanded in the twentieth. This expansion continues in the twenty-first century. Above all, in the American context, federalism conveys higher regards for regional, local, and individual diversity. Besides diversity, the idea of American federalism is to create and achieve simultaneous national unity. United States of America exhibit what can be described as dual federalism. The constitution of the United States of America provides for two types of government, the national, and the state. The constitution empowers the national government to deal with various national issues such as foreign policy, national defense, as well as fostering commerce. On the other hand, the state is empowered to deal with only local matters, criminal law, and economic regulation. This is a special type of layer-cake federalism because the state and the national government have distinct functions (Doonan 101).
The Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution of United States of America slightly changed the federalism landscape. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868 only a few years after the Civil War. A raging dispute emerged that resulted in the American Civil War of 1861–1865. The dispute mostly concerned the federalism. Some of the southern American strongly believed that only state government should be given the right to make important decisions such as slavery laws. On the other hand, they were facing strong opposition from the northerners. This dispute initiated the Fourteenth Amendment process. The Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution of United States created three key clauses that directly affected the ideology of federalism by limiting the power of state and protecting the basic rights of the citizens. The first clause limited the states’ ability to deny any citizen their privileges. The second clause limited the ability of the state to deprive Americans their legal rights. The third clause declared every American to have equal protection of the laws.
American federalism has significantly changed especially during the 21st century. Over the last century, the American people have embraced a new form of federalism. The have apparently dropping the layer cake to a new form of cooperative federalism as the state authority and the federal authority become intertwined in functions and responsibilities. Lately, the national government is being integrated slowly with local and state governments. This has apparently made it difficult to distinguish the beginning and end of one type of government. At the moment, the state and local government both administer the federal programs with no clear demarcation. For example, the state government heavily depends on funds from the federal government to support its own programs. As illustrated by Drake and Lynn (99), this practice has created a new type of cooperative federalism, also known as the marble-cake federalism. This means both the state and the federal are slowly losing their independent.
The American federalism has undergone several changes since the early 1970s. During the 21st century, many political leaders and scholars have been arguing that the national government is rapidly growing too powerful thus losing the framers’ vision of American federalism. Conversely, many political leaders demand that power of governance should be handed back to the states authority. This campaign has enabled the state government to regain some powers lately. However, the national government remains too powerful and extremely important. Most recent political leaders in United States support giving back states some powers, although, their dream has not been fully realized. Giving power to states has been the political campaign tool used by most recent presidential contenders. The new amercing federalists are taking concrete form on a diverse range of national policies. In particular, new federalists advocate for limiting the powers of federal government. They also advocate for a policy that distribute power and responsibility to states governments (Gibson 26).
The new federalism is also rapidly changing the relationship between the states and the federal governments. In particular, it has created much tension between federal and states. The new federalists demand for the limiting of state powers while the state object to that. They also want the national functions to be devolved at the state level. As explained by Zimmerman (67), supporters of the new federalism argue that state and local governments can become more active only if they properly understand their state issues and circumstances. They are averse to one-size-fits-all program designed and implemented by the federal government arguing that it cannot function effectively in all states because of different circumstances and issues. The relationship between the federal and states government continue to worsen due to these many unresolved issues. This is slowly redefining federalism and political landscape in United States of America. Unfortunately, the federal government has not appropriately responded to the growing influence of the new federalists.
The amount of power that the federal government can exercise actually depends upon several provisions of the constitution of United States of America, and their interpretation. For example, when the US Supreme interpreted federal powers to include all “necessary and proper” powers, it basically expanded the powers of the federal government. This subsequently allowed the federal government to exercise ancillary powers over states provided they do not contradict the constitutional provisions. Obviously, the new federalism appeals to many Americans due to its emphasis on state and local governments. Furthermore, many Americans nowadays believethat the federal government is becoming too unaccountable and intrusive. They believe that only the new federalism can save the situation. They strongly believe that the state government is closer to people than the federal government. Furthermore, they note that competing state and local government cannot provide a solution especially during emergencies (Saunders 122).
The US Supreme Court has played significant roles in remodeling the new federalism. In particular, the Supreme Court has played the role of “New Federalists” in the American political landscape by siding with state governments in many cases. It has provided brooding ground for the ideology of the new federalism. The US Supreme Court has also attempted to reduce the implied powers of the federal government particularly in relation to certain commerce clauses. The struggle for change is also based on certain weaknesses of the American federalism system. The major weakness of American federalism is linked to its susceptibility to centralization especially during crisis time. This has actually limited the success of the federalism system.
In conclusion, American federalism system revolves around the relationship between federal government and state government. It has evolved over time from a system of dual federalism to layer-cake federalism, and lastly to cooperative federalism. In overall, the federal government has much control of most functions due to the power bestowed to it by the constitution. The state government has power limited within their states only. Federalism in United States of America is still evolving. Most American citizens are still hoping for changes in the governance where more powers will be given to the state government. A perfect balance between the state government and the federal government has not been achieved by the American federalism system (Banks and John 87).
Work Cited
Banks, Christopher P, and John C. Blakeman. The U.S. Supreme Court and New Federalism: From the Rehnquist to the Roberts Court. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2012. Print.
Doonan, Michael. American Federalism in Practice: The Formulation and Implementation of Contemporary Health Policy. , 2013. Print.
Drake, Frederick D, and Lynn R. Nelson. States’ Rights and American Federalism: A Documentary History. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1999. Print.
Gerston, Larry N. American Federalism: A Concise Introduction. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe, 2007. Print.
Gibson, Edward L. Federalism and Democracy in Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2004. Print.
LaCroix, Alison L. The Ideological Origins of American Federalism. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2010. Print.
Saunders, Cheryl. Federalism: The Australian Experience. Pretoria: HSRC Publishers, 1997. Print.
Zimmerman, Joseph F. Contemporary American Federalism. State University of New York Press, 2009. Print.
