POLS 207- Federalism

Power Sharing Arrangements

1. Unitary system

   1. nat’l govt creates sub-national govts and gives them power

   2. Ex. states, provinces, cantons, etc

   3. subnational govts have NO independent authority but are mere administrative units

2. Confederation

   1. central govt has only those powers given to it by sub units

   2. a loose alliance of sovereign entities

3. Federal syste

   1. power constitutionally divided between central govt and subnational govt

Federal Systems

General features and power dynamics:

• Different levels of govt control same people and territory

• important policy-making powers at different levels

• each level of government protected from encroachment by the other

• each unit has the power to influence the behavior of the other

Why might a country adopt a federal system???

The Utility of federalism

Federal systems are more commonly found in:

1. larger countries

2. countries that are diverse in terms of their racial and ethnic groups, linguistic groups, religious groups, economic interests, etc.

3. Countries with longstanding historical divisions (often based on one or more of the above)

Federal systems can help maintain national-level unity

• this strategy has its advantages as well as its faults

Federal systems may be more state-centered or more nation-centered

Why Federalism for the US

The ‘states’ were there first!

• long traditions of home rule even under the English crown

Wariness of consolidating the states and giving power to a faraway central authority

• reflected in the 1st us govt

• a concern during ratification debate for US Constitution

A practical necessity for union

• but is it nonetheless desirable

The Case FOR Federalism

Protects against tyranny by further dividing power

• the double security of a compound republic (Madison, fed no 51)

Decentralizes political power

• keeps govt and policymakers closer to the people

• resists the formation of a national political class

Offers more opportunities for political participation

• more offices and officeholders

• more venues for public involvement

Enables policy diversity and reduces conflict

• rather than “one-size-fits-all”, different policies may be better suited for different states and their people

• avoids “winner-take-all” policy struggle at the federal level

Enables state-led experimentation

• states pioneer solutions and act as laboratories of democracy

May allow for greater efficiency

• some services better delivered on a smaller, state-level scale

Accountability and policy responsiveness

• residents can “vote with their feet”

The Case AGAINST Federalism

Potential for conflict w/ national interest

• public policy may become fragmented, which can impede the ability to address common national problems

• where might a piecemeal approach not work well

Creates complexity and confusion

• two governments, two sets of rules to follow

May actually reduce government accountability

• uncertainty about which government is responsible makes it more difficult to push for change

• governments can deflect blame to each other

Can drive a “race to the bottom”

• federalism can lead to inter-state competition, similar to that in international politics

• states may try to undercut others, lure away other states’ businesses, outbid each other for scarce resources

Creates and preserves inequalities

• in services and policies

  • great state-by-state differences in healthcare, public education, labor law, tax structures, minimum wage, social safety nets, etc.

• In civil liberties and rights

  • state laws regulate (within nationally prescribed limits) voting, access to public office, access to healthcare, marital status, guns and firearms

Federalism: A “Double-edged Sword”

Condensed pro-federalism argument

• federalism lets local communities manage their own affairs

• allows tailored policies for particular people

Condensed con-argument

• federalism lets local communities manage their own affairs

• states “going their own way” can impede national initiatives and even jeopardize public goods for the US as a whole

Where would you draw the line

Should the standard be uniform across all states?

• Security against foreign invasion, internal violence & insurrection

• Currency & monetary policy

• Protections of civil liberties & civil rights

• Regulation of who can come to live & work

• Labor law, employment protections, minimum wage

• Environmental regulations

• Quality of social services & benefits

• Standards & funding for public education

• Types of taxes, tax rates, & tax breaks

• Definitions of crimes & criminal penalties

• Civil contracts (including marriage)

Alternately, should there be a federal minimum standard

Assessing Federalism

• the us fed system is a result of historical polical development and political tradition

• necessary but also beneficial?

  • is it advantageous in practice

  • does it “do things backwards”, causing conflict and confusion

  • a bit of both?