Untitled Flashcards Set

The Virginia Plan favored large states with proportional representation, while the New Jersey Plan advocated for equal representation for all states. The Connecticut Compromise (Great Compromise) merged the two by creating a bicameral legislature with the House based on population and the Senate giving equal representation to states. This compromise helped shape the U.S. Constitution but continues to spark debate over the power balance between large and small states.

This clause in the U.S. Constitution counted enslaved individuals as three-fifths of a person for congressional representation and taxation purposes. It was a compromise between Southern and Northern states, giving slaveholding states more political power. The clause was later rendered obsolete by the 13th and 14th Amendments, but it remains a symbol of America's history of racial injustice.

Federalists supported a strong central government and the ratification of the Constitution, while Antifederalists feared centralized power and pushed for a Bill of Rights. Federalists, like Hamilton and Madison, argued that a strong federal government would ensure stability, while Antifederalists, like Patrick Henry, worried about individual liberties. Their debate shaped American governance, leading to the eventual adoption of the Bill of Rights.

Enumerated powers are those explicitly granted to the federal government by the Constitution, such as regulating interstate commerce and coining money. Police powers, on the other hand, belong to state governments and involve regulating health, safety, and morals. The division of these powers remains a major source of legal disputes, especially in cases involving public health and civil liberties.

This 1819 Supreme Court case upheld the federal government's implied powers and reinforced national supremacy. The ruling established that Congress could create a national bank and that states could not tax federal institutions. It significantly expanded federal authority, sparking ongoing debates over states’ rights and federal power.

Also known as "layer cake federalism," this system views federal and state governments as distinct entities with separate powers. It was dominant in the U.S. until the early 20th century, limiting federal intervention in state affairs. Critics argue that it failed to address national problems effectively, leading to shifts toward more cooperative federalism.

Modern federalism involves a more intertwined relationship between state and federal governments, often seen in cooperative efforts. Policies like federal grants-in-aid allow the national government to influence state decisions. While this approach can enhance efficiency, critics argue it sometimes undermines state autonomy.

This concept refers to the use of federal funds to influence state and local policies through grants and aid. It allows the national government to direct policy without directly controlling states. However, some argue that it pressures states into compliance, reducing their independence.

Popularized by President Nixon and later expanded by Reagan, New Federalism aims to return power to the states by reducing federal oversight. Block grants are a key tool, giving states more flexibility in spending federal funds. Supporters see it as a way to enhance local governance, while critics worry it can lead to disparities in public services.

This idea suggests that states can experiment with policies, serving as testing grounds for national reforms. It allows innovation without immediate nationwide risk, as seen in healthcare or environmental policies. However, disparities between states can lead to unequal rights and services across the country.

Federalism can help maintain cultural peace by allowing different states to enact policies that reflect their local values. This decentralized approach reduces national conflicts over issues like education and social policies. However, it can also lead to significant policy differences, sometimes exacerbating national divisions.

This concept suggests that people can influence policy by moving to states or localities that align with their preferences. It reinforces competition among states to attract residents and businesses. However, economic barriers can limit mobility, preventing equal access to preferred policies.

This occurs when states or countries lower regulations, wages, or taxes to attract businesses, often at the expense of workers and public services. It is common in areas like environmental policy and labor laws, where deregulation can lead to negative consequences. Critics argue it creates a downward spiral that harms social welfare, while supporters claim it encourages economic growth.