...What is a federal form of government? What image do you have of when you think of federalism? \Do you think of the federal level of government? State government? Local governments? All three? Layer Cake, Marble Cake....21st Century View: Intergovernmental Relations Do democratic governments need to be organized as federal systems? Great Britain has a Unitary form of government How does this differ from the U.S.? Powerful central government with federal or central government mandates (laws) that are implemented (put into place) throughout the whole country= Unitary govt. Examples: National Health Policy throughout the whole country so that you can go from city to city in Great Britain and use your health card at any hospital. (Portability of health insurance in U.S.: can get care anywhere in our country) Current American example of an issue that is being discussed as a national issue: elections Should we have Congress pass federal rules for identification, times polls are open, voting ahead of time, etc.? Do you personally tend to look to the federal government to solve problems in the U.S. ? (synonyms for federal govt.: national govt. and central govt) OR Do you tend to focus on your state government or on your city or county (local) government? We do not have good political theories of when federal minimum national standards are appropriate...
Words: 1421 - Pages: 6
...What is Federalism? As a country that is more than 200 years old, the United States of America has become known as the cornerstone of democracy within the world today. When the forefathers of the country came together to create what would become the democratic government today, they instilled a number of political values that are still functioning today. Federalism is one of these ideas. While it has its roots in Colonial America and beyond, it still has a place and can be seen in this country in 2014. The Cornell University School of Law defines Federalism in the following way: “Federalism is a system of government in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government” (Cornell, 2014). In basic terms this means that the country's government is broken up into parts that handle various levels of concern. For example, the United States of America has developed a government that functions on the local, state and federal level. Since the layout of the government is broken into these three sections, then American can be considered an example of a country that is run by Federalist principles. With that in mind, there are a number of examples of how this ideal, which can be considered dated, is still functioning within the world today. The development of a federalist type of government allows the national level to deal with issues of national concern, while the states tend to deal with issues within their own borders. “The U.S. Constitution grants the federal...
Words: 1090 - Pages: 5
...What is Federalism? Strayer University Debra Gordon To fulfill the requirements for POL110 Professor August 10, 2014 Abstract Federalism is an ideal structure of government for a nation whose citizens are divided by specific values or interests such as culture, distance or resources. In fact, federalism is a governmental system with different levels that are supreme or largely sovereign in different areas. In this essay, the main idea of federalism is described. In addition, advantages and disadvantages of federalism are identified throughout the essay. Moreover, the problems of government of a nation divided by culture, distance or resources are discussed. It is concluded that federal systems ought to distribute a balance of power between the general and constituent governments in order to fulfill different level requirements. Provide three (3) examples of how federalism has evolved from its origin to the American political system in place today. Federalism refers to the form of government that unites separate political entities or states within a single national system. However, federalism has a principle which allows each political entity or state to retain its independence. There are a number of countries that adopt the idea of federalism to form their government. A state that follows the federal system is known as federation. In fact, a federation is a political union of several states, by which effect is given to a certain state or stage of political thought...
Words: 3947 - Pages: 16
...Kara Botts Professor Claudio History 1301 10/20/2012 Federalism is defined as a political concept that is based on a group of members bounded together by an agreement made with the head of governing representative. The term federalism also describes a system of government which has the sovereignty constitutionally divided between the constituent political units including provinces and states and a central governing authority. The system of federalism is based on the democratic institutions and rules which shares the authority of governing among state/provincial and national governments, and establishing system that is termed as a federation. The proponents of federation are often called federalists (Turner, 2004.pp.105-153). The term anti-federalism defines a movement that is against the establishment of a powerful U.S. federal government and which further went against the approval of the Constitution of 1787. More authority was offered to the state governments in last constitution which is named as the Articles of Confederation. That constitution was led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, it made Anti-Federalists concerned about the position of president and about a novelty that has the possibility to change into a monarchy (Siemers, 2004.pp.213-245). The establishment of the Constitution involved detailed discussions and cooperation, and it was observed at its completion that there were still some delegates who did not seem to be satisfied with it. The main task of...
Words: 929 - Pages: 4
...Federalist or Anti-Federalist? The debate between federalists and anti-federalists was very intense during the time the constitution was ratified. The anti-federalists wished to prevent a surplus of power in the national government by giving states the supreme power. Federalists wanted a larger central government for a good military and law enforcement. The anti-federalists had the most liberty under their form of government. For this reason, I side with the anti-federalists. One problem the federalists had with their form of government was that it would allow the majority to infringe of the rights of the individuals. James Madison explained this in the federalist papers, “A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. If the views of the faction become the will of the majority of people, there is nothing to stop them from trampling on the rights of those who have different views. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party.” One thing that the anti-federalists wanted to prevent was people’s rights being taken by groups of special interests. Another problem with the federalists is that they didn’t want the states to have the right to secede. Hamilton explains it this way, “All men of sense will agree in the necessity of an energetic executive … The ingredients which constitute energy in the executive are unity; duration; an adequate provision for its support; and competent...
Words: 497 - Pages: 2
...The Role of Federalism In most instances, there are two views of federalism, Dual, and Cooperative Federalism. The history of American federalism is full of attempts to capture its true meaning in an adjective or metaphor. Scholars have generated many ways to describe many presentations of federalism relationships, theories, and arguments. Under the principle of federalism, two or more governments would exercise power and authority over the same people and the same territory. Governments of the United States and the individual states would share certain powers, such as the power to tax (Cropf, R., 2008 p. 105). The history of federalism, and its practices, offers a solution to the problem of diversity in America. Without a federal form of government, citizens fear they would be ruled by majorities from different regions with different interests and values. With the backbone of federalism, we live and apply federal principles and practices with a formal constitution. This expression explains the proper relationship between the national government and the states. Federalism in a diverse nation, ensures a balance for sustaining national cohesion and to protect the regional differences. Any attempts to extinguish regional differences may prompt a revolution. Yes, states are beholding to the national government because of the grant-in-aid, legislation, and judicial interpretations handed down from Washington. In addition, it is because of federalism that states maintain...
Words: 489 - Pages: 2
...Federalism supports a strong government and actually benefits our country by changing the government. While the anti-federalists claim to want to improve the government, but instead puts powers into the hands of the states. A centralized government that “is a system of democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments, creating what is often called a federation.” Even giving the constitution a certain amount of power, it created a method of checks and balances to prevent dictatorship. Anti-federalists wanted to the states to have more power than the centralized government. The anti-federalist view what would’ve led this country into pure corruption. The federalist, however, covered this view by thinking about it’s people by adding their opinions and covering the worries. This country needs a system of rules to live upon or else the people of this country wouldn’t know what’s hurting or benefiting it from destruction. The federalists favored limited state power. Local control was key to anti-federalist concept of democracy. Which would heat up state’s right fights in the 1800’s. For example, the anti-federalists were favored in the New Jersey Plan rather than the federalists choosing the Virginia Plan giving more power to the states like they favored. Yes, the anti-federalists believe that we should be working together as a whole. Not state by state, it is “We the People” not “We the Divided”. ...
Words: 293 - Pages: 2
...As a federalist, a strong centralized government is necessary for America to function altogether as one. With the need for a new government, the best way to finish is how you start, and that’s with a government centralized with control of check and balances limiting one rule power and tyranny. According to federalist paper No. 1, ““In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself”. Ratifying the Constitution at hand is certainly beneficial to this nation as a whole and not just beneficial to certain individual states. With congress being the main branch of public voice for the people, “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” What’s best for the people’s will voices through congress. The main difference between Anti-federalists is their want for state governments to be strong as oppose for central governments. Brutus l writes, “And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the state governments, and reduce this country to one single government.“ Arguing that point from the federalist, power should be divided because in Federalist paper No. 39 “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society...
Words: 556 - Pages: 3
...Federalism is a system of government where power is divided by a written constitution between a central government and a regional or sub-regional system. It can also be defined as a system where more than one level of government has power over the same groups of people and land at the same time. With this type of Federalist government, every day citizens have their needs met more efficiently, especially when compared to Unitary and Confederal systems of government. Federalism focuses on promoting equality and diversity among citizens under this form of system. Unitary systems of government are much different than that of Federalism. Under this type of system, local and sub-divisional governments only act on the powers they are given by the...
Words: 1558 - Pages: 7
...Assess the significance of Federalism. The founding fathers had to make a compromise that would satisfy the 13 independent colonies, meanwhile providing a secure central base. This resulted in The United States government adopting federalism. Even though federalism isn’t mentioned in the constitution, the principles of federalism are mentioned in various articles. For example article 1 section 8 displays the power available to congress. It contains the ‘elastic clause’ that potentially gives the federal government so much power over the states. And the amendments provide a list of ‘can’t do’s’ for the states. For example states can’t enter into treaties with foreign powers. As the aspects of federalism is displayed in the codified constitution, signifies the importance for the US to collectively follow this system. However, Federalism is a method of government that also allows the states to maintain their sovereignty, without the fear of intervention of the central government, unless they violate or clash with the constitution. This is evident as each state has its own constitution and its own executive, legislature and judiciary all working within the limits set by the national constitution; executive; legislature and judiciary. An example of a state constitution that has relevant articles to its needs is Idaho. For instance in their constitutions article 16, section 1 the constitution talks of the need for the Idaho legislature to pass laws that protect livestock from disease...
Words: 2060 - Pages: 9
...is federalism? The federal principle or system of government. A question that many American individuals are asked and don’t have a general understanding of what it may mean. I think federalism is a great government Institution It makes difference in the state government agency. it's also self-sufficient government to every state In the United states, people choose every elected Official Government for equal Opportunity most of the society In the world are federalism it's very Important to distribute the wealth to the state and the local community, and much more. Since its inception more than 200 years ago, American federalism has undergone tremendous change. Today, all governments -- federal, state and local -- play a greater role in the lives of their citizens, expectations about what kind of services and rights people want from government have changed, and relations among the federal, state and local governments have become infinitely more complex. In this brief essay, Ellis Katz, professor of political science and a fellow of the Center for the Study of Federalism at Temple University, explores the origins and development of American federalism, its contemporary practice and problems, and the forces that seem to be moving it in new directions. How does federalism play a part today? Many local towns and villages are dissolving or consolidating. In doing so they are able to share one police/ fire department share public works and many other resources. Fiscal Federalism can...
Words: 1015 - Pages: 5
...Strayer University POL110 Week 6 Assignment 1: What Is Federalism? Federalism is the type of government where there is segment of different powers between a state government and the central government. The United States is a federalist government where the states have their own individual powers and authority that they are able to exercise and the federal government has its own circle of authority that it tends to exercise. The evolution of Federalism in the United States was a gradual event that had definitions of federal government being given in federalist 46 and 28 which gave definitions of a federalist government to the United States. As stated by James Madison one of the architects of the federal kind of government, “the state and national governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers." The purpose of such a kind of government was to protect the rights of the people in all its earnestness. The evolution of the United States can be seen over a specific time period. Between 1970 and 1930 the form of government was known as layer cake federalism or dual federalism. There were clear powers divided between the states and the centre and there was sovereignty given in equal measure to both. Between the years 1930 and 1960 the structure was known as Cooperative federalism or marble cake federalism where the state and the central government shared functions and collaborated on issues of national importance...
Words: 828 - Pages: 4
...Not ratifying the constitution would have been the better choice. Having a federal system where the sates are supreme makes is more beneficial to the people; having a strong central government however, leaves room for domination and control. The federalist supported the constitution and wanted a strong central government. As an anti-federalist the main focus of interest is the protecting the people's rights and limiting government control. Federalist supported the constitution, and wanted immediate ratification. They favored limiting state power, and believed that a strong central government was needed to protect the country. The Federalist's response to the anti-Federalist claim that a Bill of Rights should be introduced was that it would be dangerous. If a right was not listed, what was stopping the government from violating that law? The Federalist figured it would be best if no specific law was listed. Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the constitution. Most Anti-Federalists believed that a somewhat stronger central government was needed, but for the most part favored a federal system where the states were supreme. Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the constitution because there was no bill of rights, they wanted the rights of the people to be documented, and limit government power to some degree. The anti-federalist also believed that congress and the executive branch held too much power, and they feared that people of wealth would have the opportunity to...
Words: 754 - Pages: 4
...Karli McQuaig Jennifer Powell November 17, 2014 Persuasive argument Leaders of the Philadelphia Convention had completed the Constitution for the United States of America, but many of the convention members had lingering doubts as to whether the states would approve it. According to the Articles of Confederations, unanimous approval was needed to ratify the Constitution, and convention leaders feared that this was unachievable. The constitution has helped create and mold the United States government into what it is today but it also got help from a few other very important documents. The federalist and the anti-federalist were two completely different groups of people who wanted two completely different things to happen that pertained to the constitution. He anti-federalist were completely against the reification of the constitution which without that would have not transformed our nation as it did. The federalist had the right idea that with the ratification of the constitution it would give just as much power to the government if it wasn’t ratified. “The most productive system of finance will always be the least burdensome.” The Federalist Papers are considered by many to be among the founding classics of American political thought, along with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. The Federalist Papers were part of the national debate over the ratification of the...
Words: 722 - Pages: 3
...I do believe federalism protects liberty. I think having both national and regional governments is better than just having one. They both have different ideas and responsibilities (Smith, 1). Some people argue that the Federal government has too much control or power. Personally I don’t feel that way. I think both states and the federal government have powers, and they’re able to use this power to negotiate with each other. One example of this would be federal waivers (Kettl, 3) and constitutional amendments that appear on ballots (Bowser, 13). Having both national and regional governments ensures that one government won’t become tyrannical. The president and the rest of the federal government can’t just act as they please. The state governments...
Words: 308 - Pages: 2
