Since the New Deal, the national government has played an increasing role in encouraging and even coercing states to administer federal policies. Central to this evolving relationship has been the federal government’s use of grants-in-aid to encourage states’ cooperation in implementing federal policies. Increases in federal grant-in-aid outlays throughout the second half of the twentieth century exemplify the increased role of the national government in the federal balance of power. Federal grants have seen a further twofold increase since 2000. Political actors in the national government establish these grant programs with varying degrees of flexibility and discretion given to state governments. Categorical Grants Categorical grants are federal grants given to state and local governments to encourage their cooperation in implementing specific purposes and programs. - These grants give less flexibility to state governments than block grants.
- Federal officials place significant restrictions on states that accept grants and are quite specific about how funds are to be spent in specific policy “categories.”
Block Grants Block grants are federal grants-in-aid that allow states considerable discretion (within broad limits) about how the funds will be spent. - These give greater flexibility to state political actors to tailor programs to the state’s particular needs than do categorical grants.
- The federal government places few restrictions, allowing states to spend funds within broad programmatic areas.
The Politics of Grants-in-Aid: Devolution When the Republicans took control of Congress after the 1994 elections, their “Contract with America” sought to “devolve” control of many federal programs to the states, often by replacing existing categorical grant programs with block grant programs. Two examples of this approach are welfare reform and crime policy. Devolution in Welfare Reform The Republicans replaced the federal Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) entitlement welfare program with Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which provided block grants to state governments to reform welfare. AFDC: The Federal Role - Federally administered welfare entitlement program.
- National government imposes standards and requirements.
- Federal assistance is an ongoing entitlement.
TANF: Increased State Power - Block grants to states to administer aid to the poor.
- States are free to tailor program and impose added restrictions on recipients.
- States expect recipients to move off welfare on a state-determined schedule.
Devolution in Crime Policy With the Taking Back Our Streets Act, the Republicans replaced the specific programs and grants to state and local governments that characterized the Clinton administration’s crime bill with block grants to states, allowing them to fight crime as they saw fit. 1994 Crime Bill - Clinton bill: Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
- About $10 billion in grants for specific crime control and social programs.
- States must match 25 percent of federal funds.
Taking Back Our Streets Act - Contract with America’s crime provisions: Taking Back Our Streets Act of 1995.
- About $10 billion in block grants to states to meet general crime problems.
- States must match 10 percent of federal funds.
Examining the Rationality Principle The Rationality Principle: all political behavior has a purpose. All political actors engage in instrumental acts designed to further their individual goals. One great achievement of the American founding was the creation of an effective constitutional structure of political institutions. Two important aspects of the U.S. Constitution—federalism and the separation of powers—represent, in part, the framers’ efforts to divide governmental power. Federalism limits government by creating two sovereign powers—the national government and state governments—thereby restraining the influence of both. Separation of powers imposes internal limits by dividing government against itself, giving different branches separate functions and forcing them to share power. - Who Does What? Federalism and Institutional Jurisdictions
What is federalism? Why did the Founders adopt a federal rather than a unitary system? What kinds of federal relationships did the Constitution establish and how? How and why has the federal balance of power changed over time? - Federalism is the system of government in which power is divided between a central government and regional governments; in the United States, both the national government and the state governments possess a large measure of sovereignty.
- Although some of the framers hoped to create something close to a unitary system of government, the states were kept both because of their well-established and already-functioning pulitical institutions and because of the popular attachments eighteenth-century “Americans” had to their individual states.
- The framers of the Constitution granted a few expressed powers to the national government, reserving the remainder of powers to the states.
- In addition to the expressed powers of the national government, the “necessary and proper” clause provided an avenue for expansion into the realm of “implied powers.”
- The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reserves the powers not specifically delegated to the national government “to the states respectively, or to the people.” Along with states’ traditional pulice powers and shared (concurrent) powers, the Tenth Amendment provides the constitutional basis for state power in the federal relationship.
- Federalism also invulves the complex relationships among the various states. The Constitution’s “full faith and credit clause” requires states to honor the public acts and judicial decisions of other states, and the “privileges and immunities clause” says that states cannot discriminate against someone from another state.
- Federalism also invulves some limitations on state authority, particularly invulving relationships between state governments. Local governments, while not recognized in the Constitution, are used by states in conducting the activities of government.
- Under the traditional system of “dual federalism,” which lasted from 1789 to 1937, there was a relatively clear division of federal power, with the national government limiting itself primarily to promoting commerce (buttressed by cases such as McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden), while the states did most of the governing.
- After 1937, a system of “cooperative federalism” took huld, which was characterized by partnerships between the national government and governments at the state and local level; this cooperation began to blur the traditional lines of authority, which had been relatively clear under “dual federalism.” Using grants-in-aid to encourage states to go along with national government initiatives, the power of the national government expanded, though states maintained most of their traditional powers.
- Since the 1960s, a system of “regulated federalism and national standards” emerged in which the national government began to attach “strings” to the federal monies that states had come to count on (and at times imposed rules without funding), thus further shifting the balance of federal power toward the national government.
- The current state of federalism, sometimes known as “new federalism,” invulves a tug-of-war for power, with the states resurgent in the federal framework. Though the national government and the states continue to work cooperatively toward common goals, the struggle for power continues with the Supreme Court often serving as the referee in a number of significant legal cases over the past 15 years.
- The Separation of Powers
How did the Constitution divide power between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government? What are the different roles played by each of these branches in American national government?
Which of the following is correct regarding federalism?
A federal government is one in which powers are divided between the national government and the regional governments by the Constitution itself and both operate in their respective jurisdictions independently.
Which of the following is an accurate statement regarding the nature of the modern federal system?
Which of the following is an accurate statement regarding the nature of the modern federal system? It is characterized by a struggle to balance power between the federal and state governments.
What is a true federalism?
Federalism is a mixed or compound mode of government that combines a general government (the central or "federal" government) with regional governments (provincial, state, cantonal, territorial, or other sub-unit governments) in a single political system, dividing the powers between the two.
A federal structure ensured the distribution of power between the central government and the state governments.
| 
