1. The National Government Setting Separation of Power Checks and Balances Federalism Polycentric

2. Rules of the Game Decentralization vs. Centralization of Power Separation of Executive/Legislature Federalism Independent Courts

3. Elastic Clause (a.k.a Nec. & Proper) - Article I, sec. 8. Gives Congress the authority to make whatever laws that are “necessary and proper” to carry out its enumerated responsibilities - Creates the notion of Implied power - McCullough v. Maryland (1819) * U.S. National Bank Created * Threat to Private Bank Profits - Implications: Fed. can now go beyond enumerated powers.

4. Federal Government Spending - Grants to States: land or cash grants Purpose – push policy agenda, stimulate economy, correct for externalities - Categorical Grants - Block Grants - General Revenue Sharing Grants Ended in 1987 - Mandates e.g., civil rights and environmental regulations; Federal criminal laws

5. ANALYIZING FEDERALISM Alexis de Tocqueville (1831-2) - nations need centralized power - people prefer one central government - too complicated to understand - Majority of the Tyranny - Reduces Military capacity - Government too weak to intervene in internal conflicts (almost right) -Incapable of adapting to growing diverse population

6. Federalism and Democracy - could increase representation - reverse could be true (lower govt. captured) - less quality/visible information on lower govts. - lack of national standards increased political/economic standards - “Laboratory of Democracy”

7. Federalism and Modern Politics - Eisenhower and the dictatorial centralization - Johnson’s Great Society - Nixon’s New Federalism - Carter – new agencies (Energy & Education) - Reagan and General Revenue Sharing - Clinton – National Health Care - Bush – DHS; Patriot Act - Obama – Keynesian Economics

8. POLICY RAMIFICATIONS? Flexibility? Accountability? Dispersed Costs/Concentrated Benefits Protection of Minority Rights – limits to democracy? Multiple Access Points – enhance democracy?

9. Why federalism didn’t fail Do we let state and localities deal with disasters? Or do we need a centralized agency to quickly act in times of need? Why couldn’t we respond to the needs of the people of New Orleans as fast as we responded to the disaster in Indonesia.

10. 12/26/2005 tsunami. U.S. military troops begin to mobilize a response in hours. By Jan. 1 st USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group was afloat off the Indonesian island of Sumatra, and the ship's 17 helicopters and aircrews were flying relief supplies to survivors in devastated areas. Why such the quick response? President bush could simply pick up the phone and order nearby military personnel to respond.

11. The Contrast of Katrina That wasn’t the case for Hurricane Katrina where federal agencies are frequently required to wait for state requests. Does this mean that we need to take control of disaster relief from state and local governments? Derthick doesn’t necessarily believe so.

12. Katrina Successes Getting 1-1.2 million of the 1.4 million living in New Orleans out in two days National Hurricane center provided early warning National Guard and Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries were quick to respond and saved many lives.

13. Katrina failures Arrangement for buses and other public transportation for those without cars was not made before the hurricane struck Local government encouraged development in dangerous areas Did the Corp of Engineers do a good job building the levees? Did local authorities do a good job maintaining the levees?

14. Conclusions from Katrina After the disaster many proposed to centralize authority for disaster response Derthick is skeptical that this is a good idea. Although there were clear failures, a centralized authority may not necessarily have done a better job. Each locality faces different disasters (earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.) States may better at learning how to deal with their most probable disaster Of course the federal government should lend support and resources.

15. But better coordination between local, state, and federal agencies would have improved response times. Derthick recommends that we look to the successes and the failures to improve response. Both local, state and federal agencies can make improvements without centralizing authority.

16. Growth of Polycentricity Growth in state and local government employment much fast than federal government 58% of federal employees worked in the postal service, national defense and international relations-related jobs What does this mean? More and more of policies are implemented by local and state governments.

17. Is this a good thing? Decentralization of authority allows localities to focus on their specific needs More local/state control and accountability But could lead to horizontal inequality. States might decide to spend less on services: schools/health care/child welfare. Therefore citizens living in different areas may not get the same services, thus leading to inequality of opportunity