Gov: Federalism Case Study

_________________________________________________________________________

Content Objective:

Compare and contrast the purpose and function of the U.S. federal system of government, identifying the roles and responsibilities of national, state, and local governments.

Language Objectives:

• Understand, learn, and use new vocabulary that is introduced and taught directly through informational text and direct instruction.
• Identify and/or summarize main ideas, facts, supporting details, and opinions in an informational and/or practical selection.
• Read and synthesize information found in various parts of charts, tables, or diagrams to reach supported conclusions.

Learning Target:

Students will describe and explain how to use the federal system to create change in a public issue.

_________________________________________________________________________

Federalism: Case Study

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Study 1

Federalism and Gun Control Laws

Organize into group of threes. Your group will examine three case studies in which either the national government or a state government faced conflict in exercising its powers. After examining the facts and arguments, your group will determine whether, according to the U.S. federal system, a legitimate use of power exists.

1. What interesting details do you see?
2. What federalism issue do you think this photograph represents?
3. Do you think the national government or the state government should have the power to control guns near schools?

Discuss the questions with your group. You must come to an agreement on Question 3 and be ready to share your responses with the class.

Appoint a presenter for your group.

• When called upon, presenters share your group’s response to Question 3.
• each presenter should begin their response as follows:

(Name of previous presenter), our group agrees / disagrees with your group’s ideas because ….

Outcome of United States v. Lopez (April 26, 1995)

The Supreme Court decided that Congress did not have the constitutional power to pass the Gun-Free School Zones Act. In a 5-4 decision, the Court stated,

• Congress did have the power to make laws under the Commerce Clause, but that power was limited.
• possessing a firearm in a school zone was not an economic activity, nor would it have a significant impact on the national economy.
• allowing the Gun-Free School Zones Act to remain law would give Congress the type of policing power that is reserved for the states.

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Study 2

Federalism and Cigarette Advertising Laws

After examining the facts and arguments, your group will determine

1. What interesting details do you see?
2. What federalism issue do you think this photograph represents?
3. Do you think the national government or the state government should have the power to regulate cigarette advertising?

Discuss the questions with your group. You must come to an agreement on Question 3 and be ready to share your responses with the class.

Appoint a new presenter for your group.

• When called upon, presenters share your group’s response to Question 3.
• each presenter should begin their response as follows:

(Name of previous presenter), our group agrees / disagrees with your group’s ideas because ….

Outcome of Lorillard Tobacco Company v. Reilly (June 28, 2001)

The Supreme Court decided that Massachusetts did not have the constitutional power to regulate tobacco advertising. In a 504 decision, the Court stated,

• the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) preempted any state regulations.
• Massachusetts had violated a First Amendment right to free commercial speech.
• banning the use of vending machines to sell tobacco products and keeping tobacco products out of the reach of children were valid regulations.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Case Study 3

Federalism and Air Pollution Laws

After examining the facts and arguments, your group will determine

1. What interesting details do you see?
2. What federalism issue do you think this photograph represents?
3. Do you think the national government or the state government should have the power to limit air pollution?

Discuss the questions with your group. You must come to an agreement on Question 3 and be ready to share your responses with the class.

Appoint a new presenter for your group.

• When called upon, presenters share your group’s response to Question 3.
• each presenter should begin their response as follows:

(Name of previous presenter), our group agrees / disagrees with your group’s ideas because .

Outcome of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation v. EPA (January 21, 2004)

The Supreme Court decided that the Environmental Protection Agency had the power to regulate air pollution in Alaska. In a 5-4 decision, the Court stated,

• the Clean Air Act gave the EPA the authority to override the state’s decision.
• the EPA had enough evidence to reject Alaska’s claim that the state had required the best control technology available.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the students and speakers of our government classes and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of this website, institution, or organization. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.

Gov: Federalism

_________________________________________________________________________

Content Objective:

Compare and contrast the purpose and function of the U.S. federal system of government, identifying the roles and responsibilities of national, state, and local governments.

Language Objectives:

• Understand, learn, and use new vocabulary that is introduced and taught directly through informational text and direct instruction.
• Identify and/or summarize main ideas, facts, supporting details, and opinions in an informational and/or practical selection.
• Read and synthesize information found in various parts of charts, tables, or diagrams to reach supported conclusions.

Learning Target:

Students will summarize the roles and responsibilities of national, state, and local governments.

_________________________________________________________________________

The adoption of a federalist system of government by the framers of the Constitution was not so much a choice as a necessity. The delegates attending the Constitutional Convention in 1787 knew full well that the thirteen states would be reluctant to give up any real power to a national government. As a result, the framers were careful to spell out how power should be divided among the national government and state governments.

The U.S. Constitution divides powers between the national and state governments into three categories: expressed, concurrent, and reserved. Expressed powers are powers specifically granted to the national government. The Constitution lists seventeen of these specific powers. Some powers, such as to coin money or to make treaties with other countries, are delegated exclusively to the national government. Other powers, such as to levy taxes, are concurrent powers shared by the national and state governments. The Constitution says little about the powers reserved by states, but some are placed on state governments.

For example, the Full Faith and Credit Clause insists that states recognize, honor, and enforce one another’s public actions. Because of this clause, a driver license issued in one state is recognized as legal in any other state. Additionally, the Privileges and Immunities Clause says a state cannot discriminate against residents of other states or give its own residents special privileges. This means that if someone moves to a new state, they will enjoy all of the rights given to any other citizen of that state. The Tenth Amendment further clarifies the constitutional division of powers by declaring that powers not specifically delegated to the national government are reserved for the states. These reserved powers include overseeing public schools, regulating businesses, and protecting state resources. The states also reserve the power to establish and regulate local governments.

The benefits of federalism are:

Federalism protects against the tyranny of the majority. By dividing power among several units of government, federalism makes it difficult for a majority to trample the rights of a minority.

Federalism promotes unity without imposing uniformity. Federalism allows groups with different values and different ways of life to live together in peace. Federalism allows states to pass laws that reflect the needs and goals of their citizens while still remaining part of the union of states.For example, all states support public education for young people. But how schools are funded and regulated differs from state to state depending on local preferences.

 Federalism creates laboratories for policy experiments. The flexibility of federalism allows states to act as testing grounds for innovative solutions to common problems. If a state tries a new idea and succeeds, other states will follow suit. If an experimental policy fails, the problems that result are limited to one state. A failure may provide lessons to others about better ways to implement policies.

Federalism encourages political participation. Federalism provides an opportunity for people to be involved in the political process closer to home than the nation’s capital.

For all the benefits, there are drawbacks to a federal system. One is the lack of consistency of laws and policies from state to state. This can create problems when people move from state to state. Another drawback of the federal system is the tension it sometimes creates between state and federal officials. The Constitution does not always draw a clear dividing line between national and state powers.

There are approximately 88,000 national, state, and local governments units in the United States. With so many different units of government at work in this country, relations among the different levels have evolved and changed over time.

The framers of the Constitution disagreed among themselves about the ideal balance of power among the different levels of government. From 1790 to 1933, national and state governments maintained a fairly strict division of powers. Political scientists refer to this system as dual federalism or layer cake federalism. In such a system, the two levels of government are part of the whole, but each has its own clearly outlined responsibilities. In the case of McCulloch v. Maryland, the Supreme Court made it clear that federal laws took precedent over state laws when the two came into conflict. Later, the Supreme Court clarified the roles of the state and national governments. The Gibbons v. Ogden decision drew a sharp line between state and federal power. The national government controls interstate commerce or trade among the states. The states control intrastate commerce or trade within their borders. This clear division of power was typical of how federalism worked.

During the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt launched New Deal programs in a new era of shared power among national, state, and local governments. Unlike in the past, officials worked together as allies to ease human suffering. Political scientists refer to this new era as one of cooperative federalism or marble cake federalism.A key ingredient in marble cake federalism was a mix of federal grants-in-aid programs. Grants-in-aid are funds given by the federal government to state and local government for specific programs, such as aid to the unemployed.

President Lyndon Johnson’s the Great Society was a set of programs designed to end poverty, eliminate racial injustice, and improve the environment. Johnson looked to state and local governments to carry out many of his new programs. Unlike the New Deal grants, Great Society grants-in-aid often came with strict regulations as to how the money could be spent. Johnson called his partnership with state and local governments creative federalism. However, political scientists prefer the more descriptive term regulated federalism. The 1960s also saw the rapid growth of unfunded mandates. These are programs and regulations imposed on state and local governments by Congress without adequate funding attached to them. Mandates put the burden of paying for the solutions on state and local governments.

While running for president, Richard Nixon promised voters that he would restore true federalism by reigning in federal power. Nixon called his pledge to return power to the states the new federalism. Political scientists call this return of power to the states devolution. President Nixon and later President Ronald Reagan tried to shift power back to the states by encouraging them to write their own recipes or policies for solving problems. The national government’s role was reduced to providing the ingredients in the form of federal funds.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the students and speakers of our government classes and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of this website, institution, or organization. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.

HGov Chapter 3 Summary: Federalism

---

A foremost characteristic of the American political system is its division of authority between a national government and state governments. The first U.S. government, established by the Articles of Confederation, was essentially a union of the states.

In establishing the basis for a stronger national government, the U.S. Constitution also made provision for safeguarding state interests. The result was the creation of a federal system in which sovereignty was vested in both national and state governments. The Constitution enumerates the general powers of the national government and grants it implied powers through the “necessary and proper” clause. Other powers are reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment.

From 1789 to 1865, the nation’s survival was at issue. The states found it convenient at times to argue that their sovereignty took precedence over national authority. In the end, it took the Civil War to cement the idea that the United States was a union of people, not of states. From 1865 to 1937, federalism reflected the doctrine that certain policy areas were the exclusive responsibility of the national government, whereas responsibility in other policy areas belonged exclusively to the states. This constitutional position validated the laissez-faire doctrine that big business was largely beyond governmental control. It also allowed the states to discriminate against African Americans in their public policies. Federalism in a form recognizable today began to emerge in the 1930s.

In the areas of commerce, taxation, spending, civil rights, and civil liberties, among others, the federal government now plays an important role, one that is the inevitable consequence of the increasing complexity of American society and the interdependence of its people. National, state, and local officials now work closely together to solve the nation’s problems, a situation known as cooperative federalism. Grants-in-aid from Washington to the states and localities have been the chief instrument of national influence. States and localities have received billions in federal assistance; in accepting federal money, they also have accepted both federal restrictions on its use and the national policy priorities that underlie the granting of the money.

In recent years, the issue of the relationship between the nation and states has again become a priority. Power has shifted downward to the states, and a new balance in the ever evolving system of U.S. federalism is being achieved. This change, like changes throughout U.S. history, has sprung forth from the demands of the American people.

---

Summer Assignment
Read and take Cornell notes:
3.1 Federalism: National and State Sovereignty (read pp.71-79)
3.2 Federalism in Historical Perspective (read pp.79-88)
3.3 Federalism Today (read pp.88-100)

Gov: Federalism Evolution

---

There are approximately 88,000 national, state, and local governments units in the United States. With so many different units of government at work in this country, relations among the different levels have evolved and changed over time.

The framers of the Constitution disagreed among themselves about the ideal balance of power among the different levels of government. From 1790 to 1933, national and state governments maintained a fairly strict division of powers. Political scientists refer to this system as dual federalism or layer cake federalism. In such a system, the two levels of government are part of the whole, but each has its own clearly outlined responsibilities. In the case of McCulloch v. Maryland, the Supreme Court made it clear that federal laws took precedent over state laws when the two came into conflict. Later, the Supreme Court clarified the roles of the state and national governments. The Gibbons v. Ogden decision drew a sharp line between state and federal power. The national government controls interstate commerce or trade among the states. The states control intrastate commerce or trade within their borders. This clear division of power was typical of how federalism worked.

During the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt launched New Deal programs in a new era of shared power among national, state, and local governments. Unlike in the past, officials worked together as allies to ease human suffering. Political scientists refer to this new era as one of cooperative federalism or marble cake federalism.A key ingredient in marble cake federalism was a mix of federal grants-in-aid programs. Grants-in-aid are funds given by the federal government to state and local government for specific programs, such as aid to the unemployed.

President Lyndon Johnson’s the Great Society was a set of programs designed to end poverty, eliminate racial injustice, and improve the environment. Johnson looked to state and local governments to carry out many of his new programs. Unlike the New Deal grants, Great Society grants-in-aid often came with strict regulations as to how the money could be spent. Johnson called his partnership with state and local governments creative federalism. However, political scientists prefer the more descriptive term regulated federalism. The 1960s also saw the rapid growth of unfunded mandates. These are programs and regulations imposed on state and local governments by Congress without adequate funding attached to them. Mandates put the burden of paying for the solutions on state and local governments.

While running for president, Richard Nixon promised voters that he would restore true federalism by reigning in federal power. Nixon called his pledge to return power to the states the new federalism. Political scientists call this return of power to the states devolution. President Nixon and later President Ronald Reagan tried to shift power back to the states by encouraging them to write their own recipes or policies for solving problems.The national government’s role was reduced to providing the ingredients in the form of federal funds.

Gov: Federalism

---

The adoption of a federalist system of government by the framers of the Constitution was not so much a choice as a necessity. The delegates attending the Constitutional Convention in 1787 knew full well that the thirteen states would be reluctant to give up any real power to a national government. As a result, the framers were careful to spell out how power should be divided among the national government and state governments.

The U.S. Constitution divides powers between the national and state governments into three categories: expressed, concurrent, and reserved. Expressed powers are powers specifically granted to the national government. The Constitution lists seventeen of these specific powers. Some powers, such as to coin money or to make treaties with other countries, are delegated exclusively to the national government. Other powers, such as to levy taxes, are concurrent powers shared by the national and state governments. The Constitution says little about the powers reserved by states, but some are placed on state governments.

For example, the Full Faith and Credit Clause insists that states recognize, honor, and enforce one another’s public actions. Because of this clause, a driver license issued in one state is recognized as legal in any other state. Additionally, the Privileges and Immunities Clause says a state cannot discriminate against residents of other states or give its own residents special privileges. This means that if someone moves to a new state, they will enjoy all of the rights given to any other citizen of that state. The Tenth Amendment further clarifies the constitutional division of powers by declaring that powers not specifically delegated to the national government are reserved for the states. These reserved powers include overseeing public schools, regulating businesses, and protecting state resources. The states also reserve the power to establish and regulate local governments.

The benefits of federalism are:

Federalism protects against the tyranny of the majority. By dividing power among several units of government, federalism makes it difficult for a majority to trample the rights of a minority.

Federalism promotes unity without imposing uniformity. Federalism allows groups with different values and different ways of life to live together in peace. Federalism allows states to pass laws that reflect the needs and goals of their citizens while still remaining part of the union of states.For example, all states support public education for young people. But how schools are funded and regulated differs from state to state depending on local preferences.

 Federalism creates laboratories for policy experiments. The flexibility of federalism allows states to act as testing grounds for innovative solutions to common problems. If a state tries a new idea and succeeds, other states will follow suit. If an experimental policy fails, the problems that result are limited to one state. A failure may provide lessons to others about better ways to implement policies.

Federalism encourages political participation. Federalism provides an opportunity for people to be involved in the political process closer to home than the nation’s capital.

For all the benefits, there are drawbacks to a federal system. One is the lack of consistency of laws and policies from state to state. This can create problems when people move from state to state. Another drawback of the federal system is the tension it sometimes creates between state and federal officials. The Constitution does not always draw a clear dividing line between national and state powers.

HGov: Federalism

---

A characteristic of the American political system is its division of authority between national and state governments. The first U.S. government, established by the Articles of Confederation, was essentially a union of the states. However, the Constitution was needed because the nation under the Articles of Confederation was too weak to accomplish its expected goals, particularly those of a strong defense and an integrated economy.

In establishing the basis for a stronger national government, the U.S. Constitution also made provision for safeguarding state interests. The result was the creation of a federal system in which sovereignty was vested in both national and state governments. The Constitution enumerates the general powers of the national government and grants it implied powers through the “necessary and proper” clause. Other powers are reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment.

From 1789 to 1865, the nation’s survival was at issue. The states found it convenient at times to argue that their sovereignty took precedence over national authority. In the end, it took the Civil War to cement the idea that the United States was a union of people, not of states. From 1865 to 1937, federalism reflected the doctrine that certain policy areas were the exclusive responsibility of the national government, whereas responsibility in other policy areas belonged exclusively to the states. This constitutional position validated the laissez-faire doctrine that big business was largely beyond governmental control. It also allowed the states to discriminate against African Americans in their public policies. Federalism in a form recognizable today began to emerge in the 1930s. In the areas of commerce, taxation, spending, civil rights, and civil liberties, among others, the federal government now plays an important role, one that is the inevitable consequence of the increasing complexity of American society and the interdependence of its people. National, state, and local officials now work closely together to solve the nation’s problems, a situation known as cooperative federalism. Grants-in-aid from Washington to the states and localities have been the chief instrument of national influence. States and localities have received billions in federal assistance; in accepting federal money, they also have accepted both federal restrictions on its use and the national policy priorities that underlie the granting of the money.

Throughout the nation’s history, the public through its demands on government has influenced the boundaries between federal and state power. The devolutionary trend of the 1990s, for example, was sparked by Americans’ sense that a rollback in federal power was desirable, whereas the recent expansion of federal power has been a response to Americans’ concerns about terrorism and economic recovery.