{"id":80,"date":"2025-07-09T15:32:01","date_gmt":"2025-07-09T15:32:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/staging.routledgelearning.com\/americangovernment\/?p=80"},"modified":"2025-08-14T21:14:25","modified_gmt":"2025-08-14T21:14:25","slug":"chapter-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/staging.routledgelearning.com\/americangovernment\/chapter-3\/","title":{"rendered":"Chapter 3"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Federalism and American Political Development<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

This chapter examines the role that federalism has played in the political development of the American state. First, it defines federalism as it relates to the division of power between unit and sub-unit level actors in contrast with the more commonly seen unitary and less common confederal systems around the world and in history. Then, we look at the codification of federalism within the constitutional order regarding implied, inherent, and concurrent powers. Finally, we observe the historical development of federalism from its nationalist beginnings with the Marshall court through its states\u2019 rights oriented dual federalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After impacts of industrialization, urbanization, as well as the crisis of the 1930s era Great Depression, a new vision of intergovernmental affairs arose: that of cooperative federalism. This top-down approach reached its height in LBJ\u2019s creative version, employed to implement the Great Society through the usage of grants-in-aid. These grant programs took the form of categorical and block formulations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the conservative reaction against this \u201cfiscal federalism,\u201d as critics called it, led to Nixon\u2019s and Reagan\u2019s New Federalisms. These programs were characterized by a movement away from grants-in-aid as a device for national governmental expansion to one of state and local autonomy with general revenue sharing, a renewed emphasis placed on block over categorical granting, and devolution of power back to the states\/localities.  These patterns continued into the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations with supporting Supreme Court decisions that led to a retreat of at least some elements of big government federalism. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

During the Barack Obama administration more expansive programs were enacted to deal with the Great Recession and then were diminished or withdrawn as the economy began to improve.  Although upheld by the Supreme Court, Obama\u2019s healthcare initiative encountered political resistance from the first administration of Donald Trump and a relatively supportive Congress.  Although the resistance was ineffective in dismantling Obamacare, Trump seized on strong enforcement of federal immigration policy as he threatened withdrawal of federal funding for other programs from sanctuary cities.  <\/a>His strong approach to federal funding came into question during his failed presidential campaign for a second term against Joe Biden.  The Biden administration with a supportive, if minimally, Congress, managed to implement legislation that increased support for social programs with participation of the states.  In his second term, Donald Trump renewed his effort to engage strong enforcement of federal immigration policy as well as attempting to withdrawal of federal funding for other programs. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n

Quizzes<\/h3>\n\n\n\n