Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
the relationship between the federal state and local government
the relationship between the federal state and local government
direct democracy vs federalism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Federalism and Poverty in the United States Many Americans believe that the federal government is too big, both in the number of agencies it directs and in the scope of its powers. Some people also think that the daily business of Capitol Hill has no effect on their lives, in part because they believe that politicians do not understand their problems. This dissatisfaction with Washington, D.C., in recent years has renewed debate over the division of power between federal and state and local governments. Federalism—the sharing of power between the states and the national government—has been a major issue throughout U.S. history. Thomas R. Dye defines federalism as "a division of power between two separate authorities—the nation and the states—each of which enforces its own laws directly on its citizens" (Dye, 1999, p.98). When the U.S. Constitution established the federal government in 1787, it only exercised limited or enumerated powers, such as making treaties and printing money. The Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791, clarified that all other powers belonged to the states: "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," (U.S. Const., 1791, Amend. 10). Over the years, in response to national crisis, many of the government's powers, particularly those over social programs, were centralized to the federal level. However, in recent years, an increasing number of people on Capitol Hill and across the country want to devolve, or transfer, power from Washington, D.C. to state and local governments. After the 1994 elections, the Republican majority in Congress pu... ... middle of paper ... ...eve, M.S. (1999). Real federalism. Washington D.C.: The AEI Press. Johnson, L.B. (1964). "State of the Union Address." Washington D.C. Kasich, J. (1994). "Congressional Speech." Washington D.C. Reed, B.N. (1998, December 30). States meeting standards of welfare law. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Retrieved October 16, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.jsonline.com/w2/welfare/stories/develop/1230welf.stm Regan, R. (1981). "Inaugural Address." Washington D.C. Rivlin, A.M. (1992). Reviving the American dream. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution. U.S. Constitution. (1791). Amendment 10. U.S. General Accounting Office, Health, Education, and Human Services Division. (2000). Welfare Reform: States early experiences with benefit termination. Retrieved November 13, 2000 from the World Wide Web:http://www.researchforum.org/cfm/report.cfm?id=30
In the summer of 1996, Congress finally passed and the President signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996", transforming the nation's welfare system. The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act sets the stage for ongoing reconstruction of welfare systems on a state-by-state basis. The combined programs will increase from nearly $100 billion this year to $130 billion per year in 6 years. Programs included are for food stamps, SSI, child nutrition, foster care, the bloss grant program for child- care, and the new block grant to take the place of AFDC. All of those programs will seek $700 billion over the next 6 years, from the taxpayers of America. This program in its reformed mode will cost $55 billion less than it was assumed to cost if there were no changes and the entitlements were left alone. The current welfare system has failed the very families it was intended to serve. If the present welfare system was working so well we would not be here today.
Swan, Richelle S., et al. "The Untold Story of Welfare Fraud." Journal of Sociology & Social
Jeff Grogger, Lynn A. Karoly, Jeff Grogger. Welfare Reform: Effects of a Decade of Change. New York: Harvard University Press, 2005.
In today’s America, there are many people who would either be disgusted at the very mention of Welfare or be highly grateful for its existence. I believe that in order for welfare to be more effective in America, there must be reform. From the time of its inceptions in 1935, welfare has lent a helping hand to many in crisis (Constitution Rights Foundation). However, at present many programs within the system are being abused and the people who are in real need are being cheated out of assistance. The year after the creation of welfare unemployment was just about twenty percent (Unemployment Statistics). The need for basic resources to survive was unparallel. Today, many people face the same needs as many did during the 30s. Some issues with
As of 1996, state and local governments were asked to assist many people in gaining their independence after the reform was enacted. (“Welfare Reform”) It is vital to the economy of the United States citizens to have the ability to support themselves as well as their families with no help from the government. Protecting all children and strengthening families were important parts of the reform measure. (“Welfare Reform”) The Welfare Reform Agenda of 2003 was built on the bases of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. The goals of 2003 were to assist families in achieving financial independence from the government. (“Welfare Reform”) The 2003 agenda imposed a lifetime of 5 years of welfare benefits. (“Revisiting Reform”) The agenda also required able bodied adults must go to work within two years of receiving help from the government. (“Revisiting Reform”) Welfare reform can be described as a governments attempt to alter the welfare policy of the
Prior to the New Deal, the United States practiced the traditional interpretation of dual federalism. The two forms of government were sovereign and had different parts to play, in the life of the American citizen. Under the ‘expressed powers’, the national government was granted various roles. These were the powers to collect taxes, coinage, declaration of war and regulation of commerce. However, the national government’s role in the economy was limited to interstate commerce. The tenth amendment to the constitution reserved these powers to the state governments. This in effect ensured that the state governments controlled most aspects of the economy. Federal institutions were limited to ensuring and harmonizing cooperation, between different states, on economic matters.
The U.S government works under princible called federalisim. Citizens regualte by two separate governments, federal and state. The federal government has limited power over all fifty states. State has power over their state, and no state can not make laws that conflict with federal laws. Federalisim is a system that allows two or more governments to share control over the same geographic region. The power is divided. The difference between federal and state governments power, the powers granted to the U.S. government are to collect taxes, pay debts, provide for the common defense and welfare of the U.S. The Federal Government can even boworrow money, regualte commerce within forgien nations and states. The power of the federal government
It is a commonly known fact that a large percentage of Americans are living on and relying on welfare, which is a government program that provides financial aid to individuals or groups of people who cannot support themselves. Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. There are several types of assistance offered by the government, which include healthcare, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance. The type of welfare and amounts given depend on the individual, and how many children they have. There are many people who honestly need the government assistance, but there are also many who abuse the privilege.
Although the power has shifted back and forth from stronger decentralized government to a dominant centralized government, the balance between the two has yet to fall completely. Thanks to the limitations the Founders installed into our Constitution, there has yet a time where the states or national government has the total power to control the nation as a whole. We call this type of government system as the federal system. In a federal system, there are different but separate levels of government who has their own powers. Furthermore, in order to ensure that the centralized government is not oppressing the states there are also limitations on certain national powers (McDaniel and Shaw, 2014). However, through the various Supreme Court controversial cases, we see that the Supreme Court is giving the states the choice to legalize or not laws such as same-sex marriage and gun control. Yet on the other hand, states have increasingly depended on the national government for funding various activities such as educational funds and national security funds (Kollman, 2013). Since states have to rely on the national government for the various funding, it seems as if the national government essentially has the upper hand over what the fifty states can and cannot do.
The supreme law of the land (“Constitution of the United States” 17), the source of all government power (“The Constitution” 1), the Constitution, framed in 1787 established the structure of United States government on the basis of the unprecedented notion: federalism. Federalism, the division of power amongst varying levels of government, first appeared in the English language in 1793 (Oxford English Dictionary), and has since remained true to both its American origin and denotation. In modern times, federalism is evident in the American system in addressing the West-African epidemic, and borderline pandemic, ebola. Through collaborative and individual efforts, the federal, state and local governmental bodies of the United States have exemplified the concept
Edward III, G., Wattenberg, M., & Lineberry, R. (2006). Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy (12th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.
O?Beirne, Kate. ?The State of Welfare: An old and tricky question resurfaces.? National Review 54.2 (February 11, 2002): 1--2. Online. Information Access Expanded
Federalism plays an integral part in the growth and development of the United States of America and is a key factor in determining the basis of power in this country. Clearly, the term federalism can be understood in many different ways pertaining to each person's view, but it can be more broadly defined in terms of the separation between the state and federal government. Thomas E. Patterson defines federalism as, “the division of sovereignty, or ultimate governing authority, between a national government and regional (that is, state) governments. Each directly governs the people and derives its authority from them” (Patterson 74). He then goes on to give a more basic definition with, “American Federalism is basically a system of divided powers” (Patterson 74). But federalism is more than just a word with a definition. It is hard wired into the constitution because the framers knew how important this division of power would be for the development of America and to ensure power would ultimately reside with the people.
The current state of federalism in the United States is of one of peril, plagued with recent Supreme Court rulings, current debates over the devolution of Federal powers, and variance in State governing. The United States has always been troubled with the role of the Federal government V. State government on numerous issues. Since around the time of the Great Depression, the federal government was charged with the taking care of the American public in many social and economic matters. Congress was then granted by the Supreme Court almost complete power in passing any sort by legislation by relating it somehow to the Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause found in Section 8, Article I, United States Constitution, states that Congress may regulate any and all commerce between foreign nations and the states. Congress simply related almost all legislature in some way to intrastate commerce, therefore making the passing of their legislation constitutional. This system was greatly used by Congress for almost sixty years, when, in the late nineteen-eighties and early nineteen-nineties many individuals and special interests groups challenged the constitutionally of these laws passed by Congress using the Commerce Clause. In several cases, such as United States v. Lopez, Congress was dealt a powerful blow and the states seemed to gain an upper hand. In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that Congress had exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause by enacting the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. This, along with many other laws repealed by the Supreme Court, weakened Federal control and gave power back to the states, a grievous mistake in my opinion. This increased the strains on the role of federalism in the United States and once again brought up the question, who has the power to govern what? In addition to this, federalism has taken a frightful turn with the current debates of devolution, or returning power to the states. Many current Congressmen and citizens alike believe that states should have a greater level of sovereignty and that federal power should be weakened so as to strengthen state governments. In contrast, many others believe that the Federal government should be allowed more power. This and other conflicting ideas have lead to a constant strain on the abilities of the government to best carry out its duties.
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.