Federalism can be seen as the cornerstone of liberty and the constitutional structure of America. The Founders were looking for a system that would provide them with cohesiveness between the individual states and a government. The initial widespread loyalty to the state governments prevented the Founders from wanting a unitary system. A system with a more moderate option was chosen that provided national unity, but allowed for local representation and authority to occur within the states as well. This federalist system has proven to have many benefits that met the Founders needs in a government. Federalism allows states to be independent in their policy making while also integrated within the federal system. This system allows the states to regulate their own issues while also staying connected through the federal system. The delegation of smaller government entities also allows the needs of specific groups and local representation to be more accessible to the people that they are representing. This allows for all states to have representation that is more specific to their needs and wants than broad generalizations and detachment in other forms of government. This system while allowing for constituents to be represented in a system that is beneficial to them it also insures the national government enough power to step in and correct a situation if a state is infringing on the rights of a minority. This is something that was in fact discussed in the creation of the United States system. In the Federalist Papers, number 10, by Madison he expressed that the “republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government,” stating that with a large republic like the one the Founders envisioned in the Constitut... ... middle of paper ... ... August 19). Long-Term and Short-Term Forces Shaping Attitudes Toward Federal Government Powe. Retrieved December 8, 2009, from American Political Science Association: http://www.apsanet.org The Executive Branch. (2009). Retrieved December 9, 2009, from The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/our-government/executive-branch The Judicial Branch. (2009). Retrieved December 9, 2009, from The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/our-government/judicial-branch The Legislative Branch. (2009). Retrieved December 9, 2009, from The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/our-government/legislative-branch Tiller, E. H. (1994). Putting Politics into the Positive Theory of Federalism: A Comment on Bednar and Eskridge. Retrieved December 9, 2009, from HeinOnline: http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/scal68&div=46&id=&page=q
Federalism is a system where a particular country has divided its government structure and power between a strong central government and a local government that forms constituent political units. Therefore the federal system forms an association between the two governments. The system came to existence as part of the solution to the problems that faced the federal government especially when it came to exercise of authority. The constitution only allowed for continental congress to sign treaties and call on war but in reality it had now enough resources to carry out the activities.
Federalism, established by the constitution, is like a single piece of armor protecting us from tyranny. James Madison noted in Federalist Paper #51 that “the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments [state and federal]...,” which describes his view on how the government should be divided. Each would have specific powers delegated to
The Founding Fathers had multiple reasons on why they created a federalist government, the main reasons were avoiding a tyranny, more people participating in politics, and “experimenting” the states in order to find new government ideas and programs James Madison stated the Federalist Papers, The Federalist, No. 10, If "factious leaders kindle a flame within their particular states," the national, or federal government, can "conflagration through the other states." Federalism and the 10th amendment prevents one to take control of a state or the federal government, avoiding tyranny. The idea of having more people evolved in government came from the ideals of Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson believed having both local (state) and national (federal) officials would increase participation in government.The last concept with using states as “experiments” comes from this concept: let us say that a state disastrous new policy, it would not be a disaster for everyone. In contrast, if one state 's new programs or policies work well, other states can adopt them to their own
The Age of Federalism written by two highly skilled historians Stanley Elkins and Eric Mckitrick describes how the country advance from just an idea to a working republic. In different ways, this story is about the evolution of two party system. It is surprising how the political organizations quickly became an integral party of a democratic system, but they did this regardless of warnings against political factions by American leaders who was afraid for the diverse impact it may have on the emerging republic. This book was written in order to give an analytical survey of the nation’s crucial decade under the constitution. This book provides a historical account of political, military, economic, cultural and diplomatic problems that faced the new nation. These issues are examined in the book from different point of views. The authors conducted a well-organized research using hundreds of sources such as, government documents, US documents, statesman’s papers, doctoral dissertations and newspaper articles. This book attempts to explore the great figures that played a major role in shaping this remarkable era. The authors did this in order to know them better and accurately interpret their behaviors. The book reveals Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison and Adams to be more complex, spirited and contradictory more than other
Some of the advantages of having a federal government are that the national level of government can work on the bigger picture tasks while the state government solve the local and specific issues, so that each departments time can be used wisely and efficiently. Furthermore, if citizens took their everyday problems to the national level, then the national government would be over worked and the citizen might have to travel far to even reach the states capital. Each side of the
National, Local, and State governments work together cooperatively to solve common problems rather than making separate polices. They work more on an equal level to get things fixed. This type of federalism is hard to tell where one type of government ends and the next one begins. National and state governments are independent and interdependent with an overlap of functions and financial resources. It is difficult for one to accumulate absolute power with this type of federalism.
A division of powers between the states and the federal government creates a system that is better equipped to serve the necessities of its populaces. Each state has different needs and traditions from the other. Considering these differences moral pluralism should come into play in a federalist system as explained by Jonathan Rauch. Moral pluralism provides states the power to reach their own judgments regarding matters where there is a lack of national moral consensus (Rauch, 104). For instance, states would be divided in options over topics that deal with sensitive subjects like abortion and gay marriage.
Federalism can come in different forms, ideas, and interpretations, but regardless of your preference it separates the power held within our country. In any structure there must always be a way to distinguish between who has the authority over another in order to govern effectively. While there may be some cases where federalism does not seem to provide us with such a straight forward answer, such as medical marijuana and universal health care, it still does not take away from the fact that it is there and available for us to come together on important issues.
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...
Reinventing American Federalism. Issues of Democracy: Electronic Journals of the U.S. Information Agency. April, 1997 Volume 2, Issue 2.
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.
Federalism, by definition, is the division of government authority between at least two levels of government. In the United States, authority is divided between the state and national government. “Advocates of a strong federal system believe that the state and local governments do not have the sophistication to deal with the major problems facing the country” (Encarta.com).
Federalism was selected as the most appealing system of government in 1787, primarily because of lack of feasible alternatives. Confederacy had been tried by the 13 states under the Articles of Confederation, and found to be lacking, in that it did not provide adequate cohesiveness between the individual nation-states. However, widespread loyalty to state government and identity prevented the adoption of a fully unitary system. Instead, founders chose federalism as a moderate option which could best meet the needs of a people desiring national unity, but demanding local representation and authority as well. Further consideration revealed the multiple benefits of a federalist system. Federalism provides a significant obstacle for absolutism. The various levels of government and their allotted capabilities provide firewalls against the rapid spread of extremism and radical political mutation. The national government has the ability to check such a transformation as it moves from state to state. Each comprises a separate entity, which can be influenced independently of its neighbors. On the flip side, if a certain political party is ousted from the national government, it is still likely to carry support on the state level, preventing ideological annihilation. Thus the capacity for tyranny is curbed no matter where it originates. Federalism supports union without destroying state identity. Issues can be debated on a state level, before they are addressed on a national scale. Local proceedings affect the position which state legislators take on a national scale. Not all states or parties must be in agreement on the national level, and the conclusions reached by individual states can be compared as they relate to the nation as a whole. With federalism, the results of policies enacted on a state level can be examined before being applied on a nationwide scale. This allows states the opportunity to pioneer reform and to take steps in desired directions ahead of the remainder of the country. Again, federalism provides a firewall affect, by limiting the destructive potential of original legislation. If the experiment goes awry, its negative impact is limited to the parent state. Successful enterprises can be readily inspected and adopted by other states as they see fit. Solutions to nationwide issues can be tested on the state level be...
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.
The nature of American Federalism was to make sure no one person or any group of people would try to completely take control over America. Dividing the power between the Federal and State governments reduces the risk of a tyranny. The laws and policies are all in place to help make sure everybody is treated as equal as possible and there is no threat of a single person or one race of people taking over our country. This even includes the white men who founded the American Federalism. Some white men were feeling inferior over other races and women. They wanted to make sure whites and blacks were separated and made it extremely challenging for blacks to be able to vote.