Poli Sci Test 1 chapter 3

Disadvantages of federalism

Disadvantages: • race-to- the-bottom dynamics (i.e., states compete to attract business by lowering taxes and regulations), and the difficulty of taking action on issues of national importance. The federal design of our Constitution and the system of checks and balances has jeopardized or outright blocked federal responses to important national issues. President Roosevelt's efforts to combat the scourge of the Great Depression were initially struck down by the Supreme Court. More recently, President Obama's effort to make health insurance accessible to more Americans under the Affordable Care Act immediately ran into legal challenges from some states, but it has been supported by the Supreme Court so far. However, the federal government's ability to defend the voting rights of citizens suffered a major setback when the Supreme Court in 2013 struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Examples of federal government enumerated powers and powers denied

These powers define the jurisdictional boundaries within which the federal government has authority. In seeking not to replay the problems that plagued the young country under the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution's framers granted Congress specific powers that ensured its authority over national and foreign affairs. To provide for the general welfare of the populace, it can tax, borrow money, regulate interstate and foreign commerce, and protect property rights, for example. It can't Tax State Exports, Change State Boundaries, or violate the bill of rights. Pg. 73

Categorical grants

a federal transfer formulated to limit recipients' discretion in the use of funds and subject them to strict administrative criteria

Creeping categorization

a process in which the national government attaches new administrative requirements to block grants or supplants them with new categorical grants

Block grants

a type of grant that comes with less stringent federal administrative conditions and provide recipients more latitude over how to spend grant funds

Immigration as an issue of federalism

- Immigration federalism describes the gradual movement of states into the immigration policy domain. Since the late 1990s, states have asserted a right to make immigration policy on the grounds that they are enforcing, not supplanting, the nation's immigration laws, and they are exercising their jurisdictional authority by restricting illegal immigrants' access to education, health care, and welfare benefits, areas that fall under the states' responsibilities. In 2005, twenty-five states had enacted a total of thirty-nine laws related to immigration; by 2014, forty-three states and Washington, DC, had passed a total of 288 immigration-related laws and resolutions.

Sources of state governments' revenue

50% of revenue came from taxes, while 30% came from federal grants. Sales tax—which includes taxes on purchased food, clothing, alcohol, amusements, insurance, motor fuels, tobacco products, and public utilities, for example—accounted for about 47% of total tax revenue, and individual income taxes represented roughly 35%. Revenue from service charges (e.g., tuition revenue from public universities and fees for hospital-related services) accounted for 11%.

The Nullification Crisis

A nullification crisis emerged in the 1830s over President Andrew Jackson's tariff acts of 1828 and 1832. Led by John Calhoun, President Jackson's vice president, nullifiers argued that high tariffs on imported goods benefited northern manufacturing interests while disadvantaging economies in the South. South Carolina passed an Ordinance of Nullification declaring both tariff acts null and void and threatened to leave the Union. The federal government responded by enacting the Force Bill in 1833, authorizing President Jackson to use military force against states that challenged federal tariff laws. The prospect of military action coupled with the passage of the Compromise Tariff Act of 1833 (which lowered tariffs over time) led South Carolina to back off, ending the nullification crisis.

Unitary Government

A unitary system makes subnational governments dependent on the national government, where significant authority is concentrated. Examples: France, Japan, Sweden / National government above states

Advantages of federalism

Advantages: Policy innovation at a state scale. Our federal system creates two levels of government with the capacity to take action, failure to attain a desired policy goal at one level can be offset by successfully securing the support of elected representatives at another level. Thus, individuals, groups, and social movements are encouraged to actively participate and help shape public policy. States and local communities have the latitude to address policy issues based on the specific needs and interests of their citizens

Obergefell v. Hodges

And in 2015 the Supreme Court gave same-sex marriage a constitutional basis of right nationwide in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Examples of state reserved powers and powers denied

Reserved powers: regulate intrastate commerce, conduct elections, provide for public health, safety, welfare, and morals, establish local governments, maintain National Guard, ratify amendments to the Constitution / Powers denied: tax imports and exports, coin money, enter into treaties, impair obligation of contracts, abridge privileges or immunities of citizens or deny due process and equal protection of the laws

Doctrine of nullification

States had the right to reject national laws they deemed unconstitutional.

Merits/advantages of cooperative federalism and new federalism -

Co. Fed: Because state and local governments have varying fiscal capacities, the national government's involvement in state activities such as education, health, and social welfare is necessary to ensure some degree of uniformity in the provision of public services to citizens in richer and poorer states. The problem of collective action, which dissuades state and local authorities from raising regulatory standards for fear they will be disadvantaged as others lower theirs, is resolved by requiring state and local authorities to meet minimum federal standards (e.g., minimum wage and air quality). Federal assistance is necessary to ensure state and local programs (e.g., water and air pollution controls) that generate positive externalities are maintained. For example, one state's environmental regulations impose higher fuel prices on its residents, but the externality of the cleaner air they produce benefits neighboring states. Without the federal government's support, this state and others like it would underfund such programs. New Fed: Because there are economic, demographic, social, and geographical differences among states, one- size-fits-all features of federal laws are suboptimal. Decentralization accommodates the diversity that exists across states. By virtue of being closer to citizens, state and local authorities are better than federal agencies at discerning the public's needs. Decentralized federalism fosters a marketplace of innovative policy ideas as states compete against each other to minimize administrative costs and maximize policy output.

Types of federalism through U.S. history (dual, cooperative, new) -

Dual: a style of federalism in which the states and national government exercise exclusive authority in distinctly delineated spheres of jurisdiction, creating a layer-cake view of federalism. They do not blend and are clearly defined. / Cooperative: a style of federalism in which both levels of government coordinate their actions to solve national problems, leading to the blending of layers as in a marble cake. They coordinated their actions to solve national problems. (Post Great Depression) / New: a style of federalism premised on the idea that the decentralization of policies enhances administrative efficiency, reduces overall public spending, and improves outcomes. During Nixon's administration, general revenue sharing programs were created that distributed funds to the state and local governments with minimal restrictions on how the money was spent. The election of Ronald Reagan heralded the advent of a "devolution revolution" in U.S. federalism, in which the president pledged to return authority to the states according to the Constitution.

Role of FDR and LBJ in expanding the national government's role -

FDR: New Deal / LBJ: Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare programs

Unfunded mandates, examples

Federal laws and regulations that impose obligations on state and local governments without fully compensating them for the costs of implementation, examples: One type of mandate threatens civil and criminal penalties for state and local authorities that fail to comply with them across the board in all programs, while another provides for the suspension of federal grant money if the mandate is not followed. These types of mandates are commonly referred to as cross-cutting mandates. Consider the Real ID Act of 2005, a federal law designed to beef up homeland security. The law requires driver's licenses and state-issued identification cards (DL/IDs) to contain standardized anti- fraud security features, specific data, and machine-readable technology.

Two lasting attributes of the era of cooperative federalism on federalism in the U.S

First, a nationalization of politics emerged as a result of federal legislative activism aimed at addressing national problems such as marketplace inefficiencies, social and political inequality, and poverty. The nationalization process expanded the size of the federal administrative apparatus and increased the flow of federal grants to state and local authorities, which have helped offset the financial costs of maintaining a host of New Deal- and Great Society-era programs. The second lasting attribute is the flexibility that states and local authorities were given in the implementation of federal social welfare programs. One consequence of administrative flexibility, however, is that it has led to cross-state differences in the levels of benefits and coverage.

Five characteristics common to federalist systems around the world

First, all federal systems establish two levels of government, with both levels being elected by the people and each level assigned different functions. The second characteristic common to all federal systems is a written national constitution that cannot be changed without the substantial consent of subnational governments. Third, the constitutions of countries with federal systems formally allocate legislative, judicial, and executive authority to the two levels of government in such a way as to ensure each level some degree of autonomy from the other. Another common characteristic of federalism around the world is that national courts commonly resolve disputes between levels and departments of government. Finally, subnational governments are always represented in the upper house of the national legislature, enabling regional interests to influence national lawmaking.

McCulloch v. Maryland

Fiscal hardships that plagued the government during the War of 1812, coupled with the fragility of the country's financial system, convinced Congress and then-president James Madison to create the Second Bank of the United States. Many states rejected the Second Bank, arguing that the national government was infringing upon the states' constitutional jurisdiction. A political showdown between Maryland and the national government emerged when James McCulloch, an agent for the Baltimore branch of the Second Bank, refused to pay a tax that Maryland had imposed on all out-of-state chartered banks. The standoff raised two constitutional questions: Did Congress have the authority to charter a national bank? Were states allowed to tax federal property? In McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall argued that Congress could create a national bank even though the Constitution did not expressly authorize it. Under the necessary and proper clause of Article I, Section 8, the Supreme Court asserted that Congress could establish "all means which are appropriate" to fulfill "the legitimate ends" of the Constitution. In other words, the bank was an appropriate instrument that enabled the national government to carry out several of its enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate commerce, collecting taxes, and borrowing money. This established the doctrine of implied powers and used the supremacy clause to determine whether the states could tax federal property.

AZ vs. US

In 2012, the Supreme Court affirmed federal supremacy on immigration. The court struck down three of the four central provisions of the Arizona law—namely, those allowing police officers to arrest an undocumented immigrant without a warrant if they had probable cause to think he or she had committed a crime that could lead to deportation, making it a crime to seek a job without proper immigration papers, and making it a crime to be in Arizona without valid immigration papers. The court upheld the "show me your papers" provision, which authorizes police officers to check the immigration status of anyone they stop or arrest who they suspect is an illegal immigrant. However, in letting this provision stand, the court warned Arizona and other states with similar laws that they could face civil rights lawsuits if police officers applied it based on racial profiling.

Gibbons Vs. Ogden

In Gibbons v. Ogden, the court had to interpret the commerce clause of Article I, Section 8; specifically, it had to determine whether the federal government had the sole authority to regulate the licensing of steamboats operating between New York and New Jersey. Aaron Ogden, who had obtained an exclusive license from New York State to operate steamboat ferries between New York City and New Jersey, sued Thomas Gibbons, who was operating ferries along the same route under a coasting license issued by the federal government. Gibbons lost in New York state courts and appealed. Chief Justice Marshall delivered a two-part ruling in favor of Gibbons that strengthened the power of the national government. First, interstate commerce was interpreted broadly to mean "commercial intercourse" among states, thus allowing Congress to regulate navigation. Second, because the federal Licensing Act of 1793, which regulated coastal commerce, was a constitutional exercise of Congress's authority under the commerce clause, federal law trumped the New York State license-monopoly law that had granted Ogden an exclusive steamboat operating license.

US vs. Windsor

In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court changed the dynamic established by DOMA by ruling that the federal government had no authority to define marriage. The Court held that states possess the "historic and essential authority to define the marital relation," and that the federal government's involvement in this area "departs from this history and tradition of reliance on state law to define marriage." Following the Windsor decision, the number of states that recognized same-sex marriages increased rapidly. In 2015, marriage equality was recognized in thirty-six states plus Washington, DC, up from seventeen in 2013. The diffusion of marriage equality across states was driven in large part by federal district and appeals courts, which have used the rationale underpinning the Windsor case (i.e., laws cannot discriminate between same-sex and opposite-sex couples based on the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment) to invalidate state bans on same-sex marriage. In sum, as the immigration and marriage equality examples illustrate, constitutional disputes have arisen as states and the federal government have sought to reposition themselves on certain policy issues, disputes that the federal courts have had to sort out.

Confederal Government

In a confederation, authority is decentralized, and the central government's ability to act depends on the consent of the subnational governments. Example: U.S. under Articles of Confederation / States above national government

Examples of Concurrent powers

Levy and collect taxes, borrow money, make and enforce laws, establish courts, charter banks and corporations, take property for a public purpose with just compensation. Pg. 73

Reasons why categorical grants are more popular

One reason is that elected officials who sponsor these grants can take credit for their positive outcomes (e.g., clean rivers, better-performing schools, healthier children, a secure homeland) since elected officials, not state officials, formulate the administrative standards that lead to the results. Another reason is that categorical grants afford federal officials greater command over grant program performance. Finally, once categorical grants have been established, vested interests in Congress and the federal bureaucracy seek to preserve them. The legislators who enact them and the federal agencies that implement them invest heavily in defending them, ensuring their continuation.