Section 1 Guided Reading and Review Federalism the Division of Power

Learning Objectives

Past the cease of this section, you will exist able to:

• Explain the concept of federalism
• Discuss the constitutional logic of federalism
• Identify the powers and responsibilities of federal, state, and local governments

Modern democracies divide governmental ability in ii general ways; some, similar the United States, utilize a combination of both structures. The first and more common mechanism shares power among three branches of government—the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. The second, federalism, apportions power between ii levels of government: national and subnational. In the The states, the term federal government refers to the government at the national level, while the term states means governments at the subnational level.

FEDERALISM DEFINED AND Contrasted

Federalism is an institutional arrangement that creates two relatively democratic levels of authorities, each possessing the chapters to act directly on behalf of the people with the authority granted to it by the national constitution.¹ Although today's federal systems vary in design, 5 structural characteristics are common to the United States and other federal systems around the world, including Germany and United mexican states.

Offset, all federal systems establish two levels of government, with both levels being elected by the people and each level assigned different functions. The national government is responsible for handling matters that affect the country as a whole, for example, defending the nation against foreign threats and promoting national economical prosperity. Subnational, or country governments, are responsible for matters that lie within their regions, which include ensuring the well-beingness of their people past administering education, health care, public rubber, and other public services. By definition, a organisation like this requires that different levels of government cooperate, because the institutions at each level form an interacting network. In the U.S. federal system, all national matters are handled past the federal government, which is led by the president and members of Congress, all of whom are elected by voters beyond the country. All matters at the subnational level are the responsibility of the 50 states, each headed by an elected governor and legislature. Thus, there is a separation of functions betwixt the federal and state governments, and voters choose the leader at each level.²

The second feature common to all federal systems is a written national constitution that cannot exist changed without the substantial consent of subnational governments. In the American federal organization, the twenty-seven amendments added to the Constitution since its adoption were the result of an arduous process that required approval by two-thirds of both houses of Congress and three-fourths of u.s.a.. The main advantage of this supermajority requirement is that no changes to the Constitution can occur unless there is wide support within Congress and among states. The potential drawback is that numerous national amendment initiatives—such equally the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which aims to guarantee equal rights regardless of sexual practice—accept failed because they cannot garner sufficient consent among members of Congress or, in the instance of the ERA, the states. The ERA appeared to gain new life in 2020 as a thirty-eighth country (Virginia) formally voted to ratify the amendment. Although the amendment'south original ratification deadline was in 1982, the U.South. House of Representatives has passed legislation to extend the borderline; however, the Senate has not taken upward the measure.ⁱⁱⁱ

Third, the constitutions of countries with federal systems formally allocate legislative, judicial, and executive potency to the two levels of government in such a way as to ensure each level some degree of autonomy from the other. Under the U.S. Constitution, the president assumes executive power, Congress exercises legislative powers, and the federal courts (e.grand., U.S. district courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court) assume judicial powers. In each of the fifty states, a governor assumes executive authority, a state legislature makes laws, and land-level courts (eastward.g., trial courts, intermediate appellate courts, and supreme courts) possess judicial authorisation.

While each level of government is somewhat independent of the others, a dandy deal of interaction occurs among them. In fact, the ability of the federal and state governments to achieve their objectives often depends on the cooperation of the other level of government. For example, the federal government's efforts to ensure homeland security are bolstered by the involvement of law enforcement agents working at local and state levels. On the other hand, the ability of states to provide their residents with public teaching and health care is enhanced by the federal government's financial aid.

Another common characteristic of federalism around the world is that national courts commonly resolve disputes between levels and departments of government. In the United States, conflicts betwixt states and the federal authorities are adjudicated by federal courts, with the U.S. Supreme Courtroom being the final arbiter. The resolution of such disputes can preserve the autonomy of ane level of government, equally illustrated recently when the Supreme Court ruled that states cannot interfere with the federal government's deportment relating to immigration.⁴ In other instances, a Supreme Courtroom ruling can erode that autonomy, every bit demonstrated in the 1940s when, in United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co. , the Courtroom enabled the federal government to regulate commercial activities that occurred within states, a function previously handled exclusively past the states.⁵

Finally, subnational governments are always represented in the upper business firm of the national legislature, enabling regional interests to influence national lawmaking.⁶ In the American federal organization, the U.S. Senate functions as a territorial trunk by representing the fifty states: Each land elects 2 senators to ensure equal representation regardless of state population differences. Thus, federal laws are shaped in part past state interests, which senators convey to the federal policymaking process.

Link to Learning

The governmental design of the The states is unusual; most countries do not have a federal structure. Aside from the United States, how many other countries accept a federal organization?

Division of power can also occur via a unitary structure or confederation (Figure 3.two). In contrast to federalism, a unitary organization makes subnational governments dependent on the national government, where significant say-so is full-bodied. Before the late 1990s, the United Kingdom's unitary organization was centralized to the extent that the national government held the most important levers of power. Since and then, ability has been gradually decentralized through a procedure of devolution, leading to the creation of regional governments in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland also as the delegation of specific responsibilities to them. Other democratic countries with unitary systems, such as France, Japan, and Sweden, have followed a like path of decentralization.

Figure 3.two There are three full general systems of government—unitary systems, federations, and confederations—each of which allocates ability differently.

In a confederation, authority is decentralized, and the central government's ability to act depends on the consent of the subnational governments. Under the Articles of Confederation (the commencement constitution of the Usa), states were sovereign and powerful while the national authorities was subordinate and weak. Because states were reluctant to give up any of their ability, the national authorities lacked authorisation in the face of challenges such as servicing the war debt, ending commercial disputes amongst states, negotiating trade agreements with other countries, and addressing popular uprisings that were sweeping the country. Every bit the brief American experience with confederation clearly shows, the main drawback with this arrangement of government is that it maximizes regional self-rule at the expense of effective national governance.

FEDERALISM AND THE CONSTITUTION

The Constitution contains several provisions that direct the operation of U.S. federalism. Some delineate the scope of national and state power, while others restrict information technology. The remaining provisions shape relationships amongst the states and between the states and the federal government.

The enumerated powers of the national legislature are establish in Article I, Section eight. These powers define the jurisdictional boundaries within which the federal government has authority. In seeking non to replay the problems that plagued the young land 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. To provide for the common defence of the people, the federal government can raise and support armies and declare war. Furthermore, national integration and unity are fostered with the regime's powers over the coining of coin, naturalization, postal services, and other responsibilities.

The last clause of Article I, Section 8, commonly referred to as the elastic clause or the necessary and proper clause, enables Congress "to brand all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying" out its constitutional responsibilities. While the enumerated powers ascertain the policy areas in which the national authorities has say-so, the elastic clause allows information technology to create the legal ways to fulfill those responsibilities. Notwithstanding, the open-ended structure of this clause has enabled the national government to expand its dominance beyond what is specified in the Constitution, a development as well motivated by the expansive estimation of the commerce clause, which empowers the federal government to regulate interstate economical transactions.

The powers of the state governments were never listed in the original Constitution. The consensus among the framers was that states would retain any powers not prohibited by the Constitution or delegated to the national government.⁷ Even so, when it came time to ratify the Constitution, a number of states requested that an subpoena be added explicitly identifying the reserved powers of the states. What these Anti-Federalists sought was further assurance that the national government's capacity to act directly on behalf of the people would be restricted, which the offset ten amendments (Bill of Rights) provided. The Tenth Amendment affirms united states of america' reserved powers: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited past information technology to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Indeed, state constitutions had bills of rights, which the first Congress used as the source for the outset ten amendments to the Constitution.

Some of us' reserved powers are no longer exclusively inside country domain, however. For instance, since the 1940s, the federal authorities has too engaged in administering wellness, safety, income security, teaching, and welfare to state residents. The purlieus between intrastate and interstate commerce has get indefinable as a result of broad estimation of the commerce clause. Shared and overlapping powers have become an integral part of contemporary U.S. federalism. These concurrent powers range from taxing, borrowing, and making and enforcing laws to establishing court systems (Figure 3.iii).^eight

Figure iii.3 Ramble powers and responsibilities are divided betwixt the U.S. federal and state governments. The two levels of authorities as well share concurrent powers.

Article I, Sections 9 and 10, along with several constitutional amendments, lay out the restrictions on federal and state say-so. The most of import restriction Section 9 places on the national authorities prevents measures that cause the deprivation of personal liberty. Specifically, the regime cannot suspend the writ of habeas corpus, which enables someone in custody to petition a approximate to make up one's mind whether that person's detention is legal; pass a pecker of attainder, a legislative action declaring someone guilty without a trial; or enact an ex mail facto constabulary, which criminalizes an deed retroactively. The Bill of Rights affirms and expands these constitutional restrictions, ensuring that the government cannot encroach on personal freedoms.

The states are also constrained by the Constitution. Article I, Section 10, prohibits u.s. from entering into treaties with other countries, coining money, and levying taxes on imports and exports. Like the federal government, usa cannot violate personal freedoms by suspending the writ of habeas corpus, passing bills of attainder, or enacting ex post facto laws. Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, prohibits the states from denying citizens the rights to which they are entitled past the Constitution, due procedure of police force, or the equal protection of the laws. Lastly, three civil rights amendments—the Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Xx-Sixth—prevent both the states and the federal regime from abridging citizens' correct to vote based on race, sex, and age. This topic remains controversial because states take not always ensured equal protection.

The supremacy clause in Article 6 of the Constitution regulates relationships between the federal and state governments by declaring that the Constitution and federal police force are the supreme law of the land. This ways that if a state law clashes with a federal law institute to be within the national government's constitutional potency, the federal law prevails. The intent of the supremacy clause is not to subordinate usa to the federal government; rather, information technology affirms that one body of laws binds the land. In fact, all national and country government officials are jump past oath to uphold the Constitution regardless of the offices they concord. Yet enforcement is not always that simple. In the case of marijuana employ, which the federal regime defines to exist illegal, thirty-six states and the District of Columbia have withal established medical marijuana laws, others have decriminalized its recreational utilize, and xv states have completely legalized it. The federal authorities could act in this expanse if it wanted to. For example, in addition to the legalization result, there is the question of how to treat the money from marijuana sales, which the national government designates equally drug money and regulates nether laws regarding its deposit in banks.

Various constitutional provisions govern state-to-state relations. Article IV, Section 1, referred to equally the full faith and credit clause or the comity clause, requires u.s. to accept court decisions, public acts, and contracts of other states. Thus, an adoption document or driver's license issued in one state is valid in any other state. The motility for marriage equality has put the full faith and credit clause to the test in contempo decades. In light of Baehr v. Lewin , a 1993 ruling in which the Hawaii Supreme Court asserted that the land's ban on same-sex union was unconstitutional, a number of states became worried that they would be required to recognize those union certificates.⁹ To accost this concern, Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Defense of Wedlock Act (DOMA) in 1996. The police force alleged that "No state (or other political subdivision within the United states of america) need recognize a marriage betwixt persons of the same sexual practice, even if the marriage was ended or recognized in some other state." The law also barred federal benefits for aforementioned-sex partners.

DOMA clearly made the topic a land matter. It denoted a choice for states, which led many states to have up the policy outcome of matrimony equality. Scores of states considered legislation and election initiatives on the question. The federal courts took upwards the issue with zeal after the U.S. Supreme Court in Us v. Windsor struck down the office of DOMA that outlawed federal benefits.¹⁰ That move was followed past upwardly of twoscore federal courtroom decisions that upheld marriage equality in particular states. In 2014, the Supreme Court decided not to hear several key case appeals from a variety of states, all of which were brought by opponents of spousal relationship equality who had lost in the federal courts. The consequence of non hearing these cases was that federal court decisions in four states were affirmed, which, when added to other states in the same federal circuit districts, brought the total number of states permitting same-sex marriage to thirty.^eleven Then, in 2015, the Obergefell five. Hodges example had a sweeping effect when the Supreme Court clearly identified a ramble right to marriage based on the Fourteenth Amendment.¹²

The privileges and immunities clause of Article IV asserts that states are prohibited from discriminating against out-of-staters by denying them such guarantees as admission to courts, legal protection, holding rights, and travel rights. The clause has not been interpreted to mean in that location cannot be any difference in the way a country treats residents and not-residents. For instance, individuals cannot vote in a state in which they do not reside, tuition at state universities is higher for out-of-country residents, and in some cases individuals who accept recently become residents of a state must wait a certain corporeality of time to be eligible for social welfare benefits. Another constitutional provision prohibits states from establishing trade restrictions on goods produced in other states. However, a state can tax out-of-state goods sold within its borders as long as state-fabricated appurtenances are taxed at the same level.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF FINANCES

Federal, country, and local governments depend on different sources of revenue to finance their almanac expenditures. In 2014, total revenue (or receipts) reached $iii.2 trillion for the federal government, $ane.7 trillion for the states, and $one.2 trillion for local governments.¹³ Two important developments have fundamentally changed the allotment of revenue since the early 1900s. First, the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913 authorized Congress to impose income taxes without apportioning information technology among united states on the basis of population, a crushing provision that Article I, Section 9, had imposed on the national government.¹⁴ With this change, the federal regime's ability to raise revenue significantly increased and and so did its power to spend.

The second development regulates federal grants, that is, transfers of federal money to land and local governments. These transfers, which do not have to be repaid, are designed to back up the activities of the recipient governments, merely also to encourage them to pursue federal policy objectives they might not otherwise adopt. The expansion of the federal government's spending ability has enabled it to transfer more grant money to lower government levels, which has accounted for an increasing share of their full acquirement.^xv

The sources of revenue for federal, state, and local governments are detailed in Figure 3.4. Although the data reverberate 2020 results, the patterns we see in the figure requite us a good thought of how governments have funded their activities in recent years. For the federal regime, 47 percent of 2020 revenue came from individual income taxes and 38 pct from payroll taxes, which combine Social Security tax and Medicare taxation.

Figure 3.iv As these charts indicate, federal, state, and local governments raise acquirement from different sources.

For land governments, 39 percent of revenue came from taxes, while 25 percent consisted of federal back up. Sales tax—which includes taxes on purchased food, article of clothing, alcohol, amusements, insurance, motor fuels, tobacco products, and public utilities, for example—accounted for about 47 percentage of total tax revenue, and individual income taxes represented roughly 38 per centum. Revenue from service charges (e.g., tuition revenue from public universities and fees for hospital-related services) accounted for 15 percent.

The tax construction of states varies. Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming practise not have private income taxes. Yet, such decisions on taxation reflect a classic tradeoff, as each state government must collect some mix of acquirement in order to fund their chosen public services. These states find revenue through higher belongings taxes and through tax revenues related to tourism. Figure 3.5 illustrates yet another departure: Fuel taxation as a percentage of total tax revenue is much higher in Southward Dakota and West Virginia than in Alaska and Hawaii. Withal, most states have washed little to forbid the erosion of the fuel tax'south share of their total revenue enhancement revenue between 2007 and 2009 (notice that for many states the dark blueish dots for 2010 are to the left of the light blue numbers for 2007). Fuel tax revenue is typically used to finance state highway transportation projects, although some states practise use it to fund non-transportation projects.

Effigy iii.v The fuel tax as a pct of tax revenue varies profoundly beyond states.

The most of import sources of acquirement for local governments in 2018 were taxes, federal and state grants, and service charges. For local governments the property taxation, a levy on residential and commercial real estate, was the most important source of tax acquirement, bookkeeping for about 72 per centum of the total. Federal and state grants deemed for 30 percent of local regime acquirement. Charges for hospital-related services, sewage and solid-waste product direction, public metropolis university tuition, and airdrome services are important sources of full general acquirement for local governments.

Intergovernmental grants are important sources of revenue for both state and local governments. When economic times are skilful, such grants help states, cities, municipalities, and townships carry out their regular functions. All the same, during difficult economical times, such every bit the Great Recession of 2007–2009, intergovernmental transfers provide much-needed financial relief as the revenue streams of country and local governments dry up. During the Great Recession, tax receipts dropped as business activities slowed, consumer spending dropped, and family unit incomes decreased due to layoffs or work-hour reductions. To starting time the adverse furnishings of the recession on the states and local governments, federal grants increased by roughly 33 percent during this flow.^sixteen

The COVID-nineteen pandemic of 2020–2021 ushered in a massive mobilization of activity and coordination at and between various levels of U.Due south. authorities in the hope of defeating the mortiferous virus that overwhelmed hospitals and led to most 600,000 deaths nationwide besides every bit a bleeding of state and local regime jobs. The amount of federal funding to the states eclipsed the levels provided during the Slap-up Recession. The $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Deed passed past Congress and signed by President Biden included $350 million in directly aid to state, local, and tribal governments.¹⁷ Furthermore, earlier in the pandemic, the CARES Deed, signed by President Trump, established the $150 billion Coronavirus Relief Fund to aid these same governments. Many other federal funding flows occurred outside these two packages, including support for vaccinations and the vaccine rollout across the nation.¹⁸

How are the revenues generated past our revenue enhancement dollars, fees nosotros pay to utilize public services and obtain licenses, and monies from other sources put to employ by the different levels of regime? A good starting betoken to proceeds insight on this question equally information technology relates to the federal government is Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution. Call back, for instance, that the Constitution assigns the federal government diverse powers that allow it to affect the nation every bit a whole. A wait at the federal budget in 2019 (Figure three.6) shows that the three largest spending categories were Social Security (24 percent of the total budget); Medicare, Medicaid, the Children'due south Health Insurance Programme, and marketplace subsidies under the Affordable Intendance Deed (24 percent); and defense and international security assistance (18 percent). The rest was divided among categories such as safety internet programs (eleven pct), including the Earned Income Tax Credit and Kid Tax Credit, unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other low-income assistance programs; involvement on federal debt (vii percent); benefits for federal retirees and veterans (8 percent); and transportation infrastructure (3 per centum).¹⁹ It is articulate from the 2019 federal budget that providing for the full general welfare and national defense consumes much of the government'southward resource—non but its revenue, but likewise its authoritative capacity and labor ability.

Effigy iii.vi Approximately two-thirds of the federal budget is spent in just three categories: Social Security, wellness intendance and health insurance programs, and defense.

Figure three.7 compares recent spending activities of local and land governments. Educational expenditures constitute a major category for both. However, whereas the states spend comparatively more than local governments on university education, local governments spend even more on elementary and secondary pedagogy. That said, nationwide, state funding for public college education has declined as a percentage of university revenues; this is primarily considering states have taken in lower amounts of sales taxes as internet commerce has increased. Local governments allocate more than funds to police protection, fire protection, housing and customs evolution, and public utilities such as water, sewage, and electricity. And while state governments classify comparatively more funds to public welfare programs, such as health intendance, income support, and highways, both local and country governments spend roughly similar amounts on judicial and legal services and correctional services.

Figure three.7 This listing includes some of the largest expenditure items for country and local governments.

leathermanthandeant1974.blogspot.com

Source: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/3-1-the-division-of-powers

Share this post