Overview of the American state structure and its historical evolution.
Various Perspectives on the State by APD Scholars:
“The bureaucratic state” (Carpenter 2001)
“The garrison state” (Friedberg 2000)
“The wartime state” (Dudziak 2012)
“The warfare state” (Sparrow 2011)
“The national security state” (Stuart 2008)
“The straight state” (Canaday 2011)
“The sympathetic state” (Dauber 2012)
“The litigation state” (Farhang 2010)
“The invisible welfare state” (Howard 1997)
“The agricultural welfare state” (Sheingate 2001)
“The submerged state” (Mettler 2011)
The state constitutes a network of interconnected institutions of governance and representation, characterized by its legitimacy, stability, resilience, and evolution (Mettler and Valelly 2016).
State Capacity: The government’s capability to enact the will of its legitimate principals effectively when needed (Mettler and Valelly 2016).
Role of Professionals in the State:
Professionals influence policy and actions influenced by political linkages, social demands, and their own worldviews (Mettler and Valelly 2016).
Fundamental needs include the capacity to tax, mobilize for war, and manage economic activity minimally.
Over time, states adapt by increasing welfare provisions and labor market regulations.
Charles Tilly's Argument: "War made the state and the state made war."
Growth of capacity: As states demand more from citizens, there develops a reciprocity, compelling subjects to advocate for additional state services and meet new needs.
States must negotiate with civil societies for resource extraction, achieving a balance between coercion and consensual agreements (Baldwin 25).
Visualizing states on a spectrum, from garrison-like authority structures to more internally regulated, self-governing societies (Baldwin 25).
Why do Americans agree to pay taxes?
Potential threats of penalties? Social pressures? Other possible reasons?
Are some states inherently weaker than others? Comparison of the United States with European countries in terms of state strength.
Americans tend to mistrust the state which results in limitations on its growth, contrasted with European perspectives.
Centralization vs Federalization:
Differences in state centralization and interventionist tendencies in countries such as France and Germany.
Nature of State Intervention: States differ qualitatively rather than just in strength or weakness.
States provide options such as rehabilitation versus harsh punishment for criminals and government subsidies versus indirect tax deductions.
First Generation: All nations will eventually become welfare states.
Second Generation: Identifies varieties of welfare states, with the Scandinavian model as an ideal.
Third Generation: Acknowledges inner differences within seemingly similar welfare states.
Questioning the uniformity in how states confront problems and emphasizing the uniqueness of each state's approach.
Increasingly complex state involvement in areas like public health and safety, which contradicts the belief in limited governance.
Federal government utilized treaties and warfare for territorial acquisition while implementing land policies to encourage migration without overwhelming the state’s initial capabilities (Frymer 2014).
The view of the American state as historically weak has shifted; it's now viewed as simply different in its organizational and operational capacities, yet some aspects still highlight weaknesses.
The state exhibited engagement in significant activities but lacked various capacities considered standard today. Major turning points leading to greater state capacity included:
The Civil War
Reconstruction and the New Deal.
Comprehension of state capacity and its transformations over time.
Evaluation of Baldwin’s theory on state strength and interpretations of American state capacity.
Next Class Assignments:
Bensel's Yankee Leviathan (one chapter)
Suryanarayan and White, “Slavery, Reconstruction, and Bureaucratic Capacity in the American South.”
Importance of accurate demographic knowledge for state functionality, updated every decade to inform governmental representation and planning.
Changed methodologies and contents reflect broader socio-political conflicts, particularly regarding slavery.
Significant increases in national budget and the emergence of a large federal bureaucracy.
Reconstruction as an experiment in interracial democracy leading to advances in Black representation and infrastructure.
Greater taxation in southern states due to inclusion of a poorer median voter.
A concerted effort by white southern Democrats to restore pre-war social hierarchies through regression in taxation and governance.
Examination of taxation levels concerning prewar slavery and evolving political and economic power dynamics in the South post-Reconstruction.
Identification of differing American states during the late 19th century and how they differ from classic European state models.
The complexity of power structures and potential reforms that were gradually dismantled after Reconstruction.
The intersection of economic crisis and governmental intervention, shaping policy responses.
Introduction of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) and Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) marked a significant turn towards a new interventionist approach.
AAA succeeded in institutionalization, while NIRA faced significant challenges post-Supreme Court rulings.
Evaluating the implications of differing frameworks for state capacity versus organizational strengths.
The effectiveness of administrative frameworks pre-existing the New Deal shaped the outcomes of state interventions.
World War II reinforced existing state power dynamics and led to increased public acceptance of taxation.
The evolution and establishment of mass-based income tax became a central feature of post-war revenue generation.
The development of state capacity continues to adapt through various administrations, reflecting shifting priorities and strengths.
Analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the U.S. state under both Trump and Biden administrations and their implications for current governance.