Federalism in action is the process of the complex network of governments within the federal system. It is the shared revenues of lower units of government that are mandated to perform under specific requirements in order to receive federal assistance. One such primary function of states and localities is to integrate immigrants into the union of the United States and thus to bring the country to terms with demographic change. There are currently mandates in place for sub federal immigration regulation that demonstrate how the federal-state-local dynamic operates as an integrated system to manage immigration. However, this process cannot be managed by a single government, and it often results in states and localities adopting positions in …show more content…
conflict with federal policy. The processes of global integration are changing how governments do business.
Nowhere is this change more apparent than in fiscal federalism and the economic connection that exists within the intergovernmental funding system. Among the most debatable regulatory trends of recent years is the rise of state and local efforts designed to control immigrant movement and define immigrant access to government funding. Politicians who have addressed immigration federalism largely have focused on whether the national government or the states will be better at protecting or advancing immigrants’ interests. However, the Constitutional conditions set forth in 1787 created the precedence that the states would give up their power to the federal government in order to “form a more perfect union” and in turn, the federal government would provide values and uniform national policy implemented by the states. Additionally, the fiscal or financial federalism would also ensure the equally distributed wealth, employment and resource allocation among the states. This checks and balances process should work consistently across the nation however, not all states are fiscally equal. The federal government, under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, does not have a general power to give directions to the states in their primary areas of power. Consequently, more often than not, financial enticement, through grants of money tied to a particular policy objective, has been the favored mechanism …show more content…
for achieving federal purpose. Financial arrangements have been the principal means within intergovernmental relations by which national policies have been implemented by and through the states (Shafritz et al., 2013, p. 147, para. 2). These grant programs can more or less control how the states operate due to the overwhelming need for federal funding. States are required to follow specific standards in order to meet the criteria of receiving such aid therefore, even if a state decides to make their own policy on a particular amendment, the federal government can then deny the grant funding. For example, on May 20, 2015 Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signed House Bill 15-1323 that requires all Colorado schools to give parents’ written notice informing them that students may now opt out of the state standardized tests (State Assessments Administration Rules, 2015). These tests have been proven to be a financial burden on small districts, misrepresentative of the student’s knowledge and can be considered culturally biased. This new Act would normally be very good news for educators that spend countless hours away from actual instruction to administer these tests and by requiring the announcement that students are not required to take them, the obvious will happen. Unfortunately, this bill does not clearly explain that schools must later report the number of students that did not take the test, subsequently reducing their federal funding by the number of students not participating. For a school that depends on those federal funds, students not taking the test could financially cripple the school. This conflict between state and federal policy puts schools directly in the middle of a disagreement of political power. Many would still argue that the intergovernmental system still serves a purpose to explicitly understand where to go for such issues and provides a structure for what governments can and cannot do. Since the Constitution was enacted however, many Presidents have tried to reform federalism and the intergovernmental operations through dual, cooperative, creative and newer ideas of federalism all resulting in being a revitalization of a previous attempt. New forms are usually seen only in times of great tragedy that the management of intergovernmental relations plays out in state agencies. However, even then, the federal jurisdictional mandates place proverbial hand-cuffs on the states by other forms of payment. At a March 2014 symposium on intergovernmental relations, National League of Cities and International City/County Management Association portrayed the intergovernmental system as broken, perhaps even dead.
Describing the intergovernmental system as much less cooperative as it was in the mid-20th century but how it still lies in the heart of national policy. In defense, they set forth new state-federal lobbying objectives one such that supports a comprehensive immigration reform. This policy has been at the top of the list of policy makers for more than thirty years. The political climate in Washington, D.C., has made it increasingly difficult for these associations to influence the formulation of policies by Congress and the executive branch. It is only unless powerful nongovernmental interests also support their policy proposals that it could move forward, but then state and local governments retain some ability to block objectionable policies (Kincaid, 2014, para. 3). President Obama is taking executive action to protect millions of non-documented immigrants from deportation, however his Republican controlled Congress has a conflicting interest. Therefore these new objectives will ultimately lie in limbo with the states over who will support his plan (Santana, 2014). Immigration and our global demographic changes remain in the hands of the function of states and localities and the fiscal federalist bureaucracy of an intergovernmental mess. It will most likely be left
to the new, new, new federalism policy brought forth by our next President.
Paul Peterson wrote on the price of federalism. He weighed out options and the consequences of having a federal government. In this chapter, Peterson comes up with the description of two theories, the functional and the legislative. According to Peterson, the functional theory was positive and implied that the federal governments are tasked to perform their obligations fully to the people (Coleman et al, 2011). The legislative theory is brought forward as pessimist by arguing that leaders misuse their powers. Furthermore, Peterson recommends the incorporation of economic realities into policies for proper governance.
The United States of America is one of the most powerful nation-states in the world today. The framers of the American Constitution spent a great deal of time and effort into making sure this power wasn’t too centralized in one aspect of the government. They created three branches of government to help maintain a checks and balance system. In this paper I will discuss these three branches, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial, for both the state and federal level.
Despite American government being characteristically dominated by cooperative feudalism, there is a persistence of national supremacy elements, state’s rights, and dual fideism. The current situation can, therefore, be regarded as balanced federalism. A cooperative relationship between state government and the national government is specifically rooted in a transfer of payments done from the national government to government in lower levels, which is referred to as fiscal feudalism (Bednar, 2009). There are mainly two types of grants which are block grants and categorical grants. This is a federal aid which is spent by states within a given policy area, although with much state discretion. General revenue sharing (GRS) was used back in the 1970s and 1980s. GRS awarded the state maximum control over policies, but gaining political support was difficult for them.
The United States was formed by the immigration of many people from all over the world. Americans take pride in knowing that we are a people of vast ethnic backgrounds and culture. However, at the present time, the flow of illegal immigration, as well as a large influx of other legal immigrants is placing a strain on our land of "huddled masses." Legal immigration to the United States can easily be handled and is welcomed by most Americans. However, the flow of illegal immigrants, especially from Mexico, must be stemmed, due to the strain it is placing on the government, (at the local, state and federal level), as well as the general population. Illegal immigrants are costing the United States over 24 billion dollars a year in taxpayers money (National Review 12.13.93). Something must be done to reduce the flow of illegal immigration into the United States. The focus of this paper will be the problems caused by and possible solutions to the problem of illegal immigration.
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.
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...
For over ten years, efforts to make changes to the United States immigration system have been put aside due to wars, attacks within our homeland and even worldwide financial crisis but it seems as though this being brought up more and more often. The history of the US immigration policy was more concerned with immigration enforcement over immigration reform. It was not until a few years ago that the US citizens voted they were tired of enforcement-only immigration policies and the pain they caused on immigrant families. So most feel now is the time to draw up new immigration laws that reflect American values and beliefs, and it ne...
Ewing, Walter. "The Many Facets Of Effective Immigration Reform." Society 47.2 (2010): 110-117. Academic Search Complete. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
I call to action an immediate immigration reform NOW! Anti-illegals and Pro- amnesty Organizations Missions There are many organizations, interest groups, coalitions who oppose an immigration reform. These anti-immigration groups, share common positions, they feel that immigrants pose a threat to them they could be terrorist, drug dealers and criminals; they also worry about the use of public help from the government which they pay (Messerli, n.d.).
Federalism is a political system in which authority is divided between different levels of government (Barbour and Wright, 75). Federalism has been around since 1787 in the United States of America. The divided powers between the state governments and the national governments are powers that are limited to a certain level so they do not depend on each other for power. The United States of America has a federal government in which the central government shares influence with the numerous smaller state governments. The idea was for a “more perfect union.”
Immigration is one of the most political and economic issues been raised by the states. Most of the financial burdens for social services fall largely on the states and local governments through their entitlement programs which are over weighing the budgets.
The U.S. Constitution creates a unique system of federalism. It is a system of government that divides power between a central governmental unit and local administrations. In this way, both central and local governments enjoy sovereignty. However, because the two governments share authority over the same territory, it may be problematic to establish the division of their powers. The central power needs to exercise its authority without infringing the authority of a local government while local governments should not encroach on national interests. The American federalism is defined by the Constitution which establishes the separation of power between federal and state governments, but throughout history, federalism has experienced a number
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...
Federalism is a legal concept that is centered around the concept that law is best handled as a two layered responsibility. Federalism is also built on a belief that sharing power with the local government is key to a successful governance. According to the text book, “the United States was the first nation to adopt federalism as its governing framework” (pg83). The following are a few examples of some advantages, as well as disadvantages of Federalism.