1. FEDERALISM Forms of Government Structure
Constitutional Basis for Federalism
Development of Federalism
Evolution of Federalism
Federalism and Supreme Court Today

2. Volunteers Needed!!!! Layer Cake Cups Marble Cake Soda Cupcakes
Creative Cake
Plates
Napkins
Forks
Cups
Soda
Tissues

3. I. Forms of Governmental Structure

4. I. Forms of Governmental Structure
A. Federalism: a political system in which power is divided and shared between the national/central government and the states (regional units) in order to limit the power of government.

6. I. Forms of Governmental Structure
B. Unitary Government
One central government has authority
No levels that share power
Japan, France, Great Britain
Confederation
Association of states: retain most of power
Some authority delegated to national (diplomacy, etc.)
Russian Federation

7. II. Constitutional Basis for Federalism
A. Roots of federalism:
The Framers worked to create a political system that was halfway between the failed confederation of the Articles of Confederation and the tyrannical unitary system of Great Britain.
The three major arguments for federalism are:
the prevention of tyranny;
the provision for increased participation in politics;
and the use of the states as testing grounds or laboratories for new policies and programs.

8. II. Constitutional Basis of Federalism
LO 3.2
Article IV: Relations among the States
Full Faith & Credit Clause
Each state must honor public records of other states
Privileges & Immunities Clause
Citizens of various states must be treated equally in all states
Extradition
States must return criminals to state where crime committed.
Lecture Outline
The Division of Power
The writers of the Constitution carefully defined the powers of state and national governments [see Table 3.2].
Although favoring a stronger national government, states were retained as vital components of government.
The supremacy clause deals with the question of which government should prevail in disputes between the states and the national government; Article VI states that three items are the supreme law of the land:
The Constitution
Laws of the national government (when consistent with the Constitution)
Treaties (which can only be made by the national government)
Judges in every state were specifically bound by the Constitution.
Questions remain concerning the boundaries of the national government’s powers.
The national government can only operate within its appropriate sphere and cannot usurp the states’ powers.
The Tenth Amendment states that “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
There have been variations in the Court’s interpretation of the Tenth Amendment.
To Learning Objectives

9. II. Constitutional Basis for Federalism
C. Article VI : Supremacy Article
Article VI states the U.S. Constitution, laws of Congress, and treaties are supreme.
D. 10th Amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the U.S. by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

10. II. Constitutional Basis for Federalism
The “Powers”
Enumerated & Implied Powers
For National Government
Denied Powers
Powers states CAN’T have
Reserved Powers
10th Amendment – gives states powers
Concurrent / Shared Powers
Powers both national government and states have

11. III. Development of Federalism
The allocation of powers in our federal system has changed dramatically over the years.
The Supreme Court in its role as interpreter of constitution has been a major player in the redefinition of our Federal system.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

12. Analyzing a Court Case or Two
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

13. III. Development of Federalism
McCulloch vs Maryland (1819)
McCulloch was the first major decision by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall about the relationship between the states and the national government.
The Court upheld the power of the national government to establish a national bank and denied the right of a state to tax the bank. “The power to tax is the power to destroy.”
The Court’s broad interpretation of the necessary and proper clause paved the way for later rulings upholding expansive federal powers, i.e. IMPLIED POWERS.

14. III. Development of Federalism
2. Gibbons vs Ogden (1824)
The Gibbons case centered on the conflict between the states and the powers of Congress.
The main constitutional question in Gibbons was about the scope of Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause (Article I, sec. 8: “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes”)
In Gibbons, the Court upheld broad congressional power over interstate commerce.

15. III. Development of Federalism
3. Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
The Supreme Court articulated the idea of dual federalism in which separate but equally powerful levels of government is preferable, and the national government should not exceed its enumerated powers.
Court held that Mr. Scott was not a U.S. citizen and therefore not entitled to sue in federal court.
The case was dismissed and Scott remained a slave.
Court wrote that Congress had no power to abolish slavery in the territories and slaves were private property protected by the Constitution. MO Compromise was unconstitutional.

16. III. Development of Federalism
The Civil War – Militarily the national government asserts its power over the Southern states’ claim of sovereignty.
The Struggle for Racial Equality
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) outlawed segregation in the public schools.
Civil Rights of 1960s
Lecture Outline
Establishing National Supremacy
The Civil War (1861–65) - settled militarily the issue that McCulloch had enunciated constitutionally.
The civil rights movement - a century after the Civil War, the policy issue was equality.
In 1954, the Supreme Court held that school segregation was unconstitutional (Brown v. Board of Education).
The conflict between states and the national government over equality issues was decided in favor of the national government: throughout the 1960s, the federal government enacted laws and policies to end segregation in schools, housing, public accommodations, voting, and jobs.
To Learning Objectives

17. LO 3.2 To Learning Objectives
LO 3.2 Image: Alabama Governor George Wallace failed stand in 1963 to resist integration of the all-white University of Alabama.
To Learning Objectives
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman

18. IV. Evolution of Federalism
LO 3.3
IV. Evolution of Federalism
From Dual to Cooperative Federalism
Dual Federalism – A system of government in which both the states and the national government remain supreme within their own spheres, each responsible for some policies.
Dual federalism, from Dred Scott, remained through Reconstruction and Progressive Eras.
Dual federalism finally ended in the 1930s, Great Depression demanded powerful actions from the national government.
Lecture Outline
From Dual to Cooperative Federalism
Dual federalism (“layer cake federalism”) - a form of federalism in which states and the national government each remain supreme within their own spheres.
To Learning Objectives

19. IV. Evolution of Federalism
LO 3.3
IV. Evolution of Federalism
Cooperative Federalism – A system of government in which powers and policy assignments are shared between states and the national government.
Great Depression causes national government to become major player in domestic policy. There is major shift in money from federal government to state/local governments.
Grants-in-aid monies flooded states for public works projects, work programs, relief agencies (alpabetocracy: NRA, TVA, CCC)
In the 1960’s and 1970’s the scope of federal domestic policies and programs increased steadily.
Lecture Outline
From Dual to Cooperative Federalism
Cooperative federalism (“marble cake federalism”) - a form of federalism with mingled responsibilities and blurred distinctions between the levels of government.
The American federal system leaned toward dual federalism before the national government began to assert its dominance.
To Learning Objectives

20. IV. Evolution of Federalism
LO 3.3
IV. Evolution of Federalism
C. Devolution – Transferring responsibility for policies from the federal government to state and local governments.
Began with Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.
Drastic cuts in federal domestic programs and federal income taxes in an attempt to reestablish the primacy of the states.
For the first time in thirty years, federal aid to state and local governments declined.
Reagan’s idea was that federal government had gotten too big. States should have more responsibility and authority.
Lecture Outline
Devolution?
Devolution – Transferring responsibility for policies from the federal government to state and local governments.
To Learning Objectives

21. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Welfare Reform Act of 1996
National welfare, called Aid To Families With Dependent Children (AFDC), around since 1935, was replaced with Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF).
Difference between the two? AFDC was run by national government, and TANF would be run by the states.
States would now run welfare (with some $ help from national government).

22. IV. Evolution of Federalism
LO 3.3
IV. Evolution of Federalism
E. Fiscal (creative) Federalism
Fiscal Federalism – Pattern of spending, taxing, and providing grants in the federal system.
Federal grants to state and local governments have grown rapidly and now amount to more than $600 billion per year.
Grants increased in 2010 and 2011 due to the stimulus package.
Lecture Outline
Fiscal Federalism
Fiscal federalism - the pattern of spending, taxing, and providing grants in the federal system.
Fiscal federalism is the cornerstone of the national government’s relations with state and local governments.
Grants-in-aid are the main instrument the national government uses for both aiding and influencing states and localities.
Federal aid to states and localities amounted to approximately $306 billion in 2001, despite cutbacks during the Reagan administration.
To Learning Objectives

23. Federal Grant-in-Aid Outlays, 1940-2005

24. LO 3.3 To Learning Objectives
Figure 3.1 Fiscal Federalism: Federal Grants to State and Local Governments
To Learning Objectives
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman

25. IV. Evolution of Federalism
LO 3.3
E. Fiscal Federalism (cont.)
The Grant-in-Aid System: Distributing the Federal Pie to the States ($600 billion)
Block grants – Money given to states for their use in broad areas
Grants for law enforcement, education, etc.
Block grant for law enforcement, for example, can be spent by state for anything to do with law enforcement, such as hiring more police, buying police cars, updating technology, building prisons, etc., etc.)
States LOVE block grants!!! Why? Tons of money with few strings attached. States control where $ spent.
Lecture Outline
Fiscal Federalism
There are two major types of federal aid for states and localities: categorical grants and block grants.
Categorical grants (the main source of federal aid) - grants that can be used only for specific purposes, or categories.
State and local agencies can obtain categorical grants only by applying for them and by meeting certain qualifications.
Categorical grants come with numerous “strings” (rules and requirements) attached, such as nondiscrimination provisions and punitive cross-over sanctions and cross-cutting requirements that reduce or deny federal funds if certain local or state laws are not passed or if federal guidelines are not met.
(cont.)
To Learning Objectives

26. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Categorical Grants: allocation of federal money to the states for a specific purpose
Block grant to state for law enforcement, state may CHOOSE to spend some of it on prisons. A categorical grant will be specifically for prisons. No choice on where $ can be spent.
Many strings attached to categorical grants.
i.e. no discrimination in use of $, must pay contractors a certain rate, etc.
States will accept categorical grant $, but they’d rather have the $ in block grants.
National government LOVES categorical grants because they retain more control.

27. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Federal government used grants-in-aid to FORCE behavior of states. No my way, no highway (e.g., interstate highway funds & speed limit)

28. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Types of Categorical Grants:
Project Grants: a categorical grant given for a specific project and awarded on the basis of merits of application. (i.e. state applies for a project grant to build more prisons; university research grants)
Formula Grants: a categorical grant given automatically based on a formula (formula may be based on population, per capita income, etc. (i.e. Medicaid, child nutrition programs, sewage treatment plant construction, etc.)

29. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Mandates
a requirement that national government puts on states to do something (usually provide some sort of service to citizens) at the risk of penalties or loss of funding if states don’t comply.
Mandates can be funded or unfunded.
Medicaid (partially funded mandate): States administer program, fed gov’t funds it. Possible additional mandate – states must expand medicaid to poor children. Who pays for this expansion?? If states don’t expand services, they’ll lose medicaid funding.

30. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Clean Air Act of (unfunded mandate)
Fed government establishes national air quality standards and requires that states implement them AND pay for them.
Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) (unfunded mandate)
All public facilities (hospitals, universities, libraries, etc) must be made accessible for the disabled, but did not allocate any funds to the states to pay for these changes.
No Child Left Behind Act (2002) (mostly unfunded)
Schools must increase improve student performance
Fed does not give enough $ for schools to do this.
If schools don’t improve performance, they lose fed $$.

31. IV. Evolution of Federalism
Intergovernmental Lobbies
States, counties, cities, towns, etc. ALL want federal money.
They create “lobbies” (i.e. groups) filled with “lobbiests” (i.e. people that lobby) to go and “lobby” (i.e. convince) congressman to give them more money.

33. V. Federalism and the Supreme Court
Poll after poll showed that Americans began to think that the national government was too big, too strong, and too distant to understand their concerns.
U.S. Supreme Court, once again, played a role in interpreting this new form of federalism.
Cases involving abortion, gun control, environment, use of commerce clause, right to sue.

34. V. Federalism and the Supreme Court
Generally handing back power to the states
Majority pro-states’ rights; 5-4 decisions
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) and Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992): states can restrict abortion laws
U.S. v. Lopez (1995): federal law cannot regulate guns within 1000’ of a school

35. V. Federalism and the Supreme Court
U.S. v. Morrison (2000): Violence Against Women Act (‘94) unconstitutional because it has nothing to do with regulating commerce.
Printz v. U.S. (1997): From Brady Bill regulating guns – fed gov’t can’t force states to conduct background checks to enforce a federal law.