Unitary and federal government systems operate on the principles of checks and balances and the separation of powers. Unitary systems control all local governments such as city, regional, provincial, and municipal. The president using unitary form of government “has the entire local governments, all military and police forces, all tax collection agencies, all fiscal agencies (banks), all health agencies, all prosecution agencies, all health and social welfare agencies, all natural resources agencies an labor while declaring war and national emergencies, use emergency and military powers during war, rebellion, revolution and terrorism” (Salvilla, 2006). The Central government using the judicial system has a large jurisdiction and power that is set by their parliament while having clear power of the judicial system. The unitary system does not allow provinces, towns, parishes, or counties any power because all the decisions are at a national level.
Federal system is established by the states to form their central government. The states and central government are empowered by the constitution which is administered by the judiciary. “Citizens tend to hold citizenship in a parallel manner, and have considerable power in legislature and enactments that are passed by state legislature so powerful and complex that every state has a different bar exam to qualify their own lawyers” (Scholasticus, 2010).
The Founding Fathers chose the federal system of government when framing the Constitution because they felt it was just as important that the states government and the federal government will work together. The powers delegated to the federal government were less defined and the state government was more defined on principal objec...
... middle of paper ...
...ws diversity and builds strong ethnic and national identities. Changing the US to a unitary form of government would lose each state identity.
Works Cited
Bennion, B., Thomas, C., Balamut, B., & Sleister, B. (2009). Unitary Government. Retrieved February 19, 2011, from www.slideshare.net: http://www.slideshare.net/groupseven/unitary-government
Salvilla, R. (2006, February 6). The News Today. Retrieved February 17, 2011, from www.thenewstoday.info: http://www.thenewstoday.info/2006/02/06/unitary.versus.federal.1.html
Scholasticus, K. (2010, May 27). Unitary System vs. Federal System. Retrieved February 17, 2011, from www.buzzle.com: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/unitary-system-vs-federal-system.html
Studies, N. C. (1995, March). Federalism and the 10th Amendment. Retrieved February 19, 2011, from www.nccs.net: http://www.nccs.net/newsletter/mar95nl.html
O’Connor, K., Sabato, L. J., Yanus, A. B, Gibson, Jr., L. T., & Robinson, C. (2011). American Government: Roots and Reform 2011 Texas Edition. United States: Pearson Education, Inc.
Lowi, Theodore J, et al. American Government Power & Purpose. 12th Ed. New York: W. W.
According to the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights: “The 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.” Though last in the Bill of Rights, it is one of the most powerful and ever changing in interpretation over the course of America’s history. Some historical events that altered its meaning include the Civil War, The Civil Right’s Movement, and even modern event’s like the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. In this paper I will discuss how the Tenth amendment has a large effect in both America’s history, but also how it is now portrayed America’s present.
Following the failure of the Articles of Confederation, a debate arose discussing how a centralized government ought to be organized. The prevailing opinion ultimately belonged to the Federalists, whose philosophy was famously outlined in The Federalist Papers. Recognizing that in a free nation, man would naturally divide himself into factions, they chose not to remedy this problem by stopping it at its source; instead, they would limit its effects by placing strict structural safeguards within the government's framework. The Federalists defined a facti...
To define the terminology of federalism to a simplistic way is the sharing of sovereignty between the national government and the local government. It is often described as the dual sovereignty of governments between the national and the local to exert power in the political system. In the US it is often been justified as one of the first to introduce federalism by the ‘founding fathers’ which were developed in order to escape from the overpowered central government. However, federalism in the United States is hitherto uncertain where the power lies in the contemporary political system. In this essay I will outline and explain how power relationship alternates between states and federal government. Moreover I will also discuss my perspective by weighing the evidence based upon resources. Based on these resources, it will aid me to evaluate the recent development in the federal-state relationship.
...n our federal system has changed dramatically over the years. State governments have served as training grounds for national politicians and as laboratories in which new ideas can be tested. The Supreme Court, in its role as interpreter of the Constitution, has been a major player in the redefinition of our federal system. Increasingly, Congress has been guilty of undertaking areas traditionally reserved to the states and restricting authority to regulate these areas. Both federal and state politicians compete to address problems. Over the years, power in the federal system has flowed to the national government because tax money has flowed to there. With its financial resources, the federal government has been able to offer assistance to state and local governments and thereby, involve itself in just about every governmental function performed by these governments.
The opposing argument serves as a perfect gateway to the topic of relationship between Federal and State government. In the United States, the Supremacy Clause serves...
America's republican form of representative government was premised upon the idea of three co-equal branches of government: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. The three branches, in theory, operate independent of one another and serve as check upon one another. It is this structure of this government, the founders believed, that would retard any establishment of monarchial government that the American Revolution was fought upon. However the civil war, and more specifically the Reconstruction period following it tested these principles to the core. While it may be accurate to characterize governmental struggles that defined Reconstruction as ones that were inter-branch, a more detailed and nuanced survey reveals it was borne more so out of ideologies that were incumbent within each branch. This essay surveys the ideological battles between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the federal government, and evaluates its impact on the idea of American Federalism from the past going forward.
In America the central government is the Federal government and the subdivision is the state 's. Just to have a central government and local governments does not make it federalism you must have division of powers between these two and neither the central or the sub governments receives its powers from the other, their power derives from one source which is the constitution. The purpose of federalism that was to provide further protection against tyranny, which threatened people’s, liberties. Also it was formed to prevent the formation of a concentrated power in one area of government, so the development of federalism came
According to the Federalists in the early stages of the American republic, a strong central government was necessary to provide uniform supervision to the states thus aiding in the preservation of the Union. This necessity for a more organized central government was a result of the ineffectiveness of the Article of Confederation’s government that was without a unifying government body. One component of this philosophy was the creation of an executive and other federal branche...
On the other hand the USA is a federal republic characterised by division of sovereign...
Then there is the state government which are responsible for governing affairs within their borders, and carrying out federal laws and programs at the state level. They are governed by their own constitutions and retain any rights that the U.S. Constitution does not exclusively grant to the federal government. The state government is limited as they cannot form alliances with other states and must honor and respect the laws and institutions of the other states. And finally there is the federal government which is the central and highest level of government in the U.S. It is divided into three branches and each branch has its own rights and power to check and balance the powers of each branch. The federal government has the power to regulate taxes, establish federal welfare programs and make laws in the interest of the nation as a whole. There are also limitations set to the federal government’s authority, as they cannot ask local law enforcements agencies to do minor administrative jobs. Although all levels of government have their own responsibilities there are limits to interfering with other governments
Even before the Constitution was ratified, strong argument were made by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison in the Federalist Papers urging the inclusion of a federal form of government to replace the failed confederation. In Federalist Paper No. 9 Hamilton states, “This form of government is a convention by which several smaller states agree to become members of a large one, which they intend to form. It is s kind of assemblage of societies that constitutes a new one, capable of increasing, by means of new associations, until they arrive to such a degree of power as to be able to provide for the security of a united body” (Usinfo.state.gov). The people of the United States needed a central government that was capable of holding certain powers over the states.
In spite of the prominence of the states in everyday life, the most demanding public policy questions former to the American Civil War involved discussions over the possibility of national power with most Americans believing it should remain partial. Yet federalism was still the center of political arguments. The Constitution did not report if states did nor did not reserve any remaining sovereignty in the powers given to the national government. The fact that the states were much more capable in accomplishing governmental purposes adequately t...
I believe that the advantages that Federalism provides far outweigh those of the anti-federalist movement. Our founding fathers wisely perceived that the idea of a centralized government was a big concern for abuse of power. Federalism represents many of the values of modern Democracy and grants individual states the power to make decisions that best suit their needs. Local government understands local issues better than a centralized government that often sees the nation as one big piece of land instead of smaller areas, each with distinct demographics and problems. For instance, issues concerning illegal immigration in Texas would be best handled by local authorities rather than by someone in Kansas, a non border state. By the same token, representatives of communities with different aspirations, ethnicity and cultures should be handled locally as the federal government might overlook the needs of these groups. One perfect example of the above mentioned scenario is the public school system. In a federalist system the local government decides what kind of schools will operate. Therefore, they might make better decisions when it comes to opening schools among large immigrant populations, perhaps creating a few bi-lingual schools to fulfill the population’s needs.