Chapter 3 personal notes

-Since the adoption of the constitution, the most persistent source of political conflict has been
between the national and state government.
devolution- the effort to transfer responsibility for many public programs and services from the
federal gov to the states.
-proposals to increase devolution have included block grants- Money from the national
government that states can spend within broad guidelines determined by washington.
-The dispute b/t national and state gov cannot be answered by one generation because it is a
question of growth and every successive stage of political and economic development makes it
a new question.
-The United states, canada, australia, india, germany, and switzerland are federal systems and
France, great britain, italy, and sweden are not because they are unitary systems(local govs
that they posses can be altered or abolished by the national gov) In the US, the states control
welfare, highways, police, and education while in a place like France, it is controlled nationally.
-Federalisms most obvious effect was providing tons of opportunity for political activity.
The founding fathers believed that federalism was the only way to provide personal liberty and
be able to survive as one nation. Under the Articles of Confederation the national gov was
dependent on the states and when the states weren't cooperating neither could function.
-A federation or federal republic the founders created envisioned as working like a quote from
madison. both state and fed govs are different agents and trustees of the people, constituted
with diff powers. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the
instrument of redress. which means the people could shift their support from fed gov to state as
needed to keep the two in balance.
Nullification: the doctrine that a state can declare null and void a federal law that in the states
opinion violates the constitution. The northern victory in the civil war determined once in for all
that the federal union is indissoluble and states cannot declare acts of congress
unconstitutional.
Dual federalism: Doctrine that states the gov is supreme in its sphere and the states are
supreme in theirs. the two spheres should keep separate. The courts could tell which issues the
states and gov could regulate and the court would distinguish between the two. In time the effort
to find clear principles that distinguished interstate from intrastate commerce was pretty much
abandoned.
State sovereignty: the constitution requires a distinction between what is truly national and
what is truly local. Courts have held congress exceeding its commerce before. State
constitutions tend to be far more detailed than the fed constitution on things like public
education, law enforcement, criminal justice, health and hospitals, roads and highways, public
welfare, and control over the se of public land and water supplies.
Fed gov is supreme but the laws they pass must be approved by members of congress. EX:
supreme court decided fed gov should have supreme authority over oil beneath the ocean off
the nation's coasts. 6 years later, the congress a law transferring oil reserve rights back to the
states.
Grants in aid: money given by the national gov to the states. Today they go to hundreds of
programs such as medicaid. The fed gov could not spend money for purposes not authorized by
the constitution so they gave it to states to run the programs. Federalism means when
washington wants to send money to one state or congressional district, it must send money to
many states and districts.
meeting national needs: In the 1960s the fed gov began devising grant programs based less
on what states were demanding and more on what federal officials perceived to be important
national needs. Federal officials and not state officials were the ones getting grant programs for
things like aiding the urban poor, combat crime, reduce pollution, and deal with drug abuse.
The intergovernmental lobby: The purpose of the intergovernmental lobby has been the same
as that of any private lobby-to obtain more federal money with fewer strings attached. made up
of mayors, governors, superintendents of schools, state directors of public health, county
highway commissioners, local police chiefs and others who have come to count on federal
funds.
Categorical Grants Versus Revenue sharing: Categorial grant:Federal grants for specific
purposes, such as building an airport.These types of grants usually require that the state or
locality put up money to match some part of the federal grant. Revenue sharing: When the fed
gov distributes money with no requirement for matching funds and freedom to spend money on
almost any governmental purpose. block grants and revenue sharing were supposed to give
the states freedom in deciding how to spend money while helping to relieve their tax burdens.
BUT, the gov soon put many strings on the spending. much of the growth in grants was in
categorial not block. lack of money led many states to cut or freeze state programs. Block
grants grew more slowly than categorial because of the different kinds of political coalitions
supporting each. Congress and fed bureaucracy like categorical grants because it gives them
more control of how the money is used which is why states don't like them. Categorical grants
push agencies and programs to expand revenue while block grants don't put pressure on
anyone.
Rivalry Among the States: The more important that fed money becomes to the states, the
more likely they are to compete among themselves for the biggest share of it. A city or state
shown to be losing pop may forfeit millions of dollars in federal aid.