Category: Federalism

The concept of federalism is one, which member groups are bound in togetherness by a covenant. There has to be a representative from the government who acts as their head.

Federalism can also take a form of government where there is some division between the central government and various political units for example states or provinces that operate autonomously. In any federal government, there has to be well formulated democratic rules with the power and authority to govern. The member states must thus share this power constituting what is referred to as a federation.

In federation, the constituent governments must be in favor of the federal government which has distributed powers across the national, supranational and regional level (Eugene, 2007). The most political influential movement since the early 1790s has been federalism. This is why a lot of emphasis should be put when it comes to formulating its policies and rules that will be operational over a long period of time.

Considerations in developing Emergency Response Policies

For effective development of emergency response policies there should be special considerations to issues that affect the federal government and federalism in general (Dye, 2010). This should be made with regard to views of the stakeholders since every federal government’s view must be represented in formulating the policies. The following are the considerations:

Involve stakeholders: members who form part of the federal government must be made aware and their views sorted in the process of formulating policies. This is done so as to represent each one’s view in the policies to be made.

Prediction system in place; there should be a well laid down prediction system which tries to preempt and foresee the occurrences of the emergencies and how each can be evaded. There should also be a very strong connection between the prediction system and the emergency response policies made. This will ensure anything that occurs do not take the government with a surprise.

Mechanisms and Procedures of response: there should be an appropriate differentiated procedure aimed at slowing down emergencies. Policies should thus be made alongside this consideration.

Financial consideration: there should be a flexible financial base to deal with any form of emergencies. In developing emergency policies, there should also be adequate finances to finance the whole process. There should also be good reinforcement plans to ensure the policies are operational, all these depends on finances so financial analysis is a basic consideration in emergency policy formulation.

Public Policy Lifecycle

Public policy lifecycle has a number of stages; starting from creation to the final stage which is repealed (Page, 2010). In general, the whole policy lifecycle consists of five stages. Discussion and debate; this is where policy proposals are presented to the members and each one gives his view or criticism before it moves to the second stage.

Political action; here politicians vote for or against the proposed policy, if majority vote for the policy it moves to the next step. Legislative proposal; here policy makers discuss possible solutions regarding whether to adopt the new policy or amend the existing one. The next step is law and regulation; here critical decisions are made, the public are excluded from this stage.

Here there are issues like, litigation, issue advocacy before the policy becomes effective. The final step is compliance; this is where the policy’s effectiveness is evaluated whether or not it meets its intents. If it is realized that the policy had not met its objective at any of the life cycle stages, there is repeal and the whole process begins afresh.

Importance of Developing a viable Policy

Viable policies will support growth and development; this is because they assist in directing resources towards viable cause which contributes to economic development.

Viable policies also create harmony and peace among the stakeholders, this is because federal government constituents will feel part of the policy and therefore contribute towards its effective implementation. Finally, viable policies assist in development of various administrative systems and institutions which fight bribery, fraudulent activities and corruption in public resources.

References

Dye, T. R. (2010). Understanding Public Policy, (13th Ed.). New York, NY: Longman Pearson Publishers.

Eugene, W. H. (2007). Why States? The Challenge of Federalism. Oxford: Heritage Books Publishers.

Page, S. (2010). 7 Steps to Better Written Policies and Procedures, (5^th Ed.). Process Boston: Improvement Publishing.

Introduction

It is worth to note that federalism is a situation in politics where a group of people are bound together thanks to a covenant made between the group and their leader or a governing representative head (Kelemen, 2005; p. 57). This means that federalism is based on democratic rules as well organ of governing where power is shared. To analyze the concept of federalism, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 will be used.

The act was signed into law by former president of United States of America George W. Bush. The Act supports a standard-based education reform believing that when standards are set at a higher level while measurable goals are in place education outcome of public schools will improve (Weinstein, 2011; par 4).

Roles of the three branches of federal government

Based on the three branches of a federal government, the legislative branch is bestowed with the responsibility of making the law. The branch comprises of congress and senate. It is this branch that will make laws to ensure that the NO Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act is operational.

It is also its responsibility to decide how the collected tax will be used. It is worth to note that the legislature will use various ways such as debates and gathering views of relevant stakeholders before deciding on the way forward. However, the laws once made are to be checked by the other branches of government, executive and judiciary.

The executive which comprise of the president, the vice president, secretary of state, cabinet, executive departments and agencies take the responsibility of enforcing the law. It is this group that will ensure that the NO Child Left Behind (NCLB) is signed into law and implemented. Through the president and the department of finance and education suitable strategies are to be put in place to ensure that the Act is realized.

For instance, the department of finance in consultation with schools will derive a way in which funds are to be channeled to schools. Lastly the judiciary is another important branch in federalism (Cooper, 2006; p. 132). The main responsibility of this branch is to interpret the law. In situations where there will be legal issues pertaining the program, it will be the role of the judiciary to hear issues being raised by the various parties.

Using its powers, it will then deliberate on the issue and make a ruling that is in accordance to the law of the land.

In essence, the judiciary through the U.S Supreme Court adjudicates cases and controversies that pertains to the federal government, disputes between states, interpreting the constitution, declaring legislation or executive actions made at any level of the government unconstitutional as well as create precedent for future laws and decision (Mckevitt & Lawton, 1994; p. 85).

Education being an aspect that impact on the needs and aspiration of the locals, the state have to perform certain tasks and responsibilities which interact and intersect with the roles of the three branches of federal government (Weinstein, 2011; par. 2).

The state can control education through passage of statutes only if it has plenary powers. Additionally, just like the legislative branch, the state legislature can create bodies to over-see education issues and give the body some of its powers (Fry & Raadschelders, 2008; p. 211).

It is also worth to note that the state government is given the responsibly of enforcing the laws passed by the legislative branch or regulations passed by other organs (Cooper, 2006; p. 124). However, it is important to remember that the state government can pass legislations with regards to the No Child is Left Behind provided the statutes are not in violation of the provisions of the U.S constitution.

Allocation of money

In a federal government funds or money are allocated through fiscal federalism which refers to allocation of money collected through tax as well as expenditure responsibilities between the relevant levels of government. Usually money is allocated to the following; the federal, state and the local government (Fry & Raadschelders, 2008; p. 257).

Ideally the federal government shares the revenue with both the states and the local governments. The premise of doing this is to eliminate the enormous negative effects of centralism which is not compatible with the provisions of federalism which calls for diffusion of powers which is aimed at accelerating growth economically.

Additionally, the guiding principle is that decentralization of spending responsibilities will not only lower levels of governance but also ensure that there is improved and efficient allocation of federal (Kelemen, 2005; p. 29).

Improving administration of the program

To improve the administration of the program, No Child is Left Behind, there is need to call or invite all relevant stakeholders to air their views on the current challenges facing the administration of the program. A long with these challenges, they opt to provide probable solutions.

Based on this, there is need to have in place a subcommittee that will critically evaluate the implications of the solutions. After that a rough draft will then be made available for public scrutiny (Shafreitz & Hyde, 2008; p.312). Once approved by the public, the same recommendations will be channeled to the legislature for preview which will then be passed to help realize the goals and objectives of the program.

Conclusion

The paper has critically analyzed federalism by evaluating the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The roles of the three branches of government, a strategy to improve administration of the program, the interaction and intersection of these roles and the roles of state government are also addressed.

Bibliography

Cooper, Phillip. Public law & public administration. New York: Wadsworth Publishing, 2006.

Fry, Brian & Raadschelders, Jos. Mastering public administration from Max Weber to Dwight Waldo. New York: CQ Press, 2008.

Kelemen, Daniel. Built to Last? The durability of EU federalism. Web.

Mckevitt, David & Lawton, Alan. Public sector management theory, critique and practice. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 1994.

Shafreitz, Jay & Hyde, Albert. Classics of public administration. New York: Wadsworth Publishing, 2008.

Weinstein, Anna. Obama on No Child Left Behind. Retrieved from https://www.education.com/magazine/article/Obama_Child_Left_Behind/

The anti-federalist papers of 1787 remain to be some of the most fundamental studies carried out with the sole aim of bringing out the shortcomings of the constitution that was about to be ratified. Though the papers were written by the authors who wanted to hide their identities, they did achieve some fundamental goals that led to the improvement of the constitution that was in the process of development.

Although the authors may have appeared retrogressive as they were opposed to the new constitution, it is important to acknowledge that their criticism led to identification of the major weaknesses in the document that was to be ratified to become the governing bench of the United States of America (Putz, 2009, P. 87).

According to Brutus, the author of anti-federalist paper number eighty four and many others, the constitution lacked the foresight and thus failed to take into account the future generations (Dougherty, 2009, P. 54).

Brutus was of the idea that if the American society were to ratify a constitution that would provide a harmonious living for the generations to come, there would be no need to ensure that the rights of the individuals are protected by the constitution.

The document to be ratified failed to recognize that people in a natural setting were always after their own benefit, thus posing a great danger to the others as one’s pursuit of pleasure may conflict with the other’s intentions.

Brutus envisaged that if there were no other forces in place to govern the men, then the weaker mortals would be disadvantaged by the stronger ones. Thus, according to the anti-federalist paper on human rights, the constitution was to recognize that future generations needed to be protected from the possible abuse due to breaches in the main law.

From the analysis of the assertions contained in the paper number eighty four, it is clear that the constitution that was in the process of being ratification contained some serious flows, and thus, it required attention to be paid to the areas of concern.

Therefore, it is important to note that the anti-federalist paper served as an alternative voice by helping to pinpoint spheres that needed to be rectified to ensure that the constitution that was in the process of becoming the law had the capacity to protect the interest of all the subjects (Lim, 2011, pp. 76-77).

The papers managed to introduce the new fundamental changes into the constitution even though some of them were instituted after the constitution had been ratified. For example, the institution of the bill of rights which addressed the concerns that were raised by Brutus in his anti-federalist paper number eighty four was approved after the constitution had been adopted.

Apart from the role of acting as the alternative voice for the proponents of the new constitution, the papers represented an independent view that probably was not affected by the euphoria of having a new constitution in place.

According to Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, (2005, P. 152), the anti-federalist papers showed that the constitution that was in the process of development required a serious consideration to make sure that it effectively manages all the affairs of the country and its subjects.

It is clear that the constitution in the process of being ratified failed to recognize what may have happened in the future and heavily relied on the country’s stability of regimes in the past as well as during the period of the proposed enactment.

The anti-federalists through their papers managed to attract attention to many burning issues that although their main assertions seemed to be illogical at the time, needed to ensure that the stability of the unborn generations was guaranteed.

In the anti-federalist paper number eighty four that raises the issues of fundamental rights of the citizens, Brutus reminds Americans that brutal regimes needed a constitutional backing to ensure that the fundamental rights of the citizens are not violated.

He helped arouse the sense that even though the people had no immediate problem with a brutal regime, they had no clear ability to determine the nature of the future leaders as they are known to change their behavior and views once they take office.

It is this possibility that made the author of the paper believe that passing a constitution that could infringe the human rights was a dangerous undertaking for Americans (Storing, 1981, P. 7).

Today, the rights of the American citizens are entrenched in the constitution through the elaborate bill of rights. The journey towards the inclusion of this important segment in the constitution can be traced to the anti-federalist paper number eighty four that criticizes the main law due to its lack of a clear stand on human rights.

As stated in the paper, it is important that certain quarters surrender some portions of their natural freedom for effective administration of a balanced society.

The enactment of the bill of rights guarantees that natural freedom is balanced, so those who may benefit from violating the fundamental rights of others would be restricted. Thus, the anti-federalist paper number eighty four was of great significance as it helped shape the future bill of rights adopted in the current constitution.

Reference List

Dougherty, KL 2009, ‘An Empirical Test of Federalist and Anti-Federalist Theories of State Contributions, 1775-1783‘, Social Science History, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 47-74.

Hamilton, A, Madison, J, & Jay, J 2005 The federalist. Hackett Publishing, New York, NY.

Lim, ET 2011, ‘The Anti-Federalist Strand in Progressive Politics and Political Thought’, Political Research Quarterly, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 68-84.

Putz, A 2009, Viewing the Constitution-Making Process – Need, “Danger” and (Non)Sense of a Bill of Rights: A Comparative Analysis of the United States of America and Europe. BoD, New York.

Storing, HJ 1981, The Complete Anti-Federalist, Volume 1, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Using expertise in the policy arena of homeland security, the Aggranoff’s appended version of Federalist No. 44 is a proper guide to action. The community safety calls for implementation of prevention programs that are community-based while educating citizens to cut down on violent behavior and bullying. Federalist No.44 encourages mentoring programs, which aim at supporting all aspects of young people’s lives.

Through it, young people will interact with adults in a one on one relationship. There will be making and supervising of matches by leaders to ensure the program is effective. Though programs may differ by location, provisions in the federation ensure that there is maintenance of integrity and program principles through the state organizations that oversee recruitment, screening, and matching of groups (Madison, 2010).

It also has provisions for the supervision and support to mentors. This is possible because there are restrictions to enter into treaties, alliances and confederations. Certain paragraphs of the federal (the second and third paragraph) also emphasize on the liberty of the nation’s citizens. Therefore, all citizens will work towards the success of the nation and not for individual benefits. Federalist No.44 also involves the provision of therapeutic foster care that is substantial for the lives of chronically delinquent citizens.

Restricting foreign trade in the country is vital for the economy’s development; else, every citizen will want to work towards benefitting himself/herself. Additionally, if the nation’s citizens interact freely with the outside nations, there will be non-adherence to the policies and citizens will be addressing individual issues, which are a threat for the state’s development (Madison, 2010).

Collaboration works in making inter-governmental relations (IGR) connected and knowledge oriented by controlling all activities of the nation. This is possible because it connects the dealings of the nation with the other local governments and federal state dealings. This implies that there will be links between the nations with other entities, which ensure that collaboration is possible. Leaders get information on inter-governmental issues and assist in presenting the nation’s interests in the matter. Additionally, collaboration works by addressing the multiple determinants of antisocial behavior in citizens that might cost the nation. The citizen will behave in a manner that is acceptable, and this enhances collaboration (Holloway, 1972).

Necessary leadership and administrative support are provided by resolving citizens’ complaints regarding the nation’s policies and procedures. Providing citizens with guidance on how to handle complex problems and resolving complaints is vital. Provision of the relevant leadership and administrative is by implementing policies and procedures that are standard in relation with what the nation anticipates. There is also discussion of citizens’ performance problems with them to establish causes in order to ascertain solutions.

There should also be training of citizens on what to do in order to improve a nation’s economy. Additionally, evaluation of citizens’ performance in the work field and confirming whether there is adherence to the regulations is vital. Taking appropriate actions against any citizen who does not adhere to the policies and procedures is substantial. Finally, it is vital to review the policies and procedures to ensure that they are fair and to date with the nation’s expectations at all time (Holloway, 1972).

References

Holloway, W. V. (1972). Intergovernmental Relations in the United States. New York: ACM Press.

Madison, J. (2010). The Federalist Papers. Chicago: Yale University Press.

Introduction

The federalist was a serialization of about 85 articles or essays, which were published in the New York Packet and The Independent Journal between the years 1787 to 1788. James Madison, John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and J and A Maclean wrote them. These articles or essays were published to show up support for the ratification of the New Constitution of the United States of America.

These articles were sequentially numbered as they were being published. Their names changed with time from the Federalist to The Federalist Papers.

One of these papers is a paper by Madison, “The Federalist paper number 51,” which argues about the structure of government and the checks and balances that should be there. As an argument, though this goal is achievable in practice, the question of how are they going to be appointed remains because their appointment should be devoid of the influence of the other arms that make up the government.

The Federalist Number 51

In this article published on February 6 1788, Madison argues about how the structure of government should be and how it should be realized. He states that all the different arms of the government, as per the constitution, should be independent of one another though they should work in the direction of achieving the same constitutional goals it was intended to achieve.

As per the constitution, all holders of the public office should ideally be appointed by the people using a democratic process, being in a democratic society for the full achievement and adherence of liberty. Though the constitution provides for a democratic process, it would be very difficult to appoint holders of certain public offices using the democratic process.

On the other hand, members of these offices, which are the supreme executive, judiciary magistracies, and the legislature, are supposed to work independently by observing the principle of separation of powers. This argument leads back to the conclusion that members of these government agencies should be appointed from the same pool of authority who is the people.

This, as Madison argues, will be very difficult and expensive to achieve due to the dynamics that will be involved. In essence, he is simply trying to inform the reader that, though the constitution recommends for the application and adherence to the democratic process, the democratic process cannot be applied everywhere to a full success.

Nevertheless, the questions remain, ‘who will appoint whom across the agencies if the people cannot do it through the democratic process?’ ‘Who will appoint whom across agencies and maintain the independence of each agency without fear of patronage influence?’ He therefore comes up with a conclusion of the need to acknowledge the presence of some variations to the theory.

In the formation and appointment of the judiciary, Madison observes that these positions come with peculiar qualifications. The best mode of their appointment should be one that is able to secure these qualifications. Secondly, the office holders hold these positions on a permanent basis in nature. Thus, they should be completely divorced from dependence on the authorities that appoint them.

Madison explains further that the independence of each department should be coated with the empowerment of each department to resist any probable encroachment by others. The argument is true so because, on one hand, there are three distinct departments of the government while, on the other hand, there is one department that makes the laws that make these departments or break them.

This therefore makes it necessary for each department to be immune to some extent to the encroachment by the others. He further asserts that, to govern people, the government must be given authority to govern. At the same time, the governing authority has to have an internal structure that governs itself because people who are not perfect run the government.

Madison’s emphasis on the congress is brought out when he vouches for separation of power in the government by subjecting the governing body to diverse styles of polls as well as dissimilar ideologies of action. He explains that, in a Republican government, the legislature is predominant. Thus, as a way of providing checks and balances, it should be bicameral with the two divisions checking on the other.

Madison explains that the division of power between the two governments making up one government is a double security measure to the rights of people with each side checking on the other side as well as checking on themselves.

Madison argues that, though it is imperative for the nation to watch its people not in favor of tyranny by its leaders, it is also key to protect one side of the nation against the iniquities of the other side of it and therefore need to divide power and authority among different independent agencies. Further, in his views, he explains that there is the need to protect the different groups found in the society against oppression by others.

He explains in his views that, in case the majority come together under a common purpose, then the minority will suffer and thus the need to divide the definition of citizens into separate descriptions that would at the end of the day not allow a single description to give the majority headway. Madison believes that power independent of the society has the risk of carrying with it the unjust views of the majority.

In the real life situations, these provisions for separation of power have been used to control the different arms of government. The congress, on one hand, has the power to pass resolutions. The president, on the other hand, has the powers to veto these resolutions.

However, a rejoinder to checking the president is the two third majority power of the congress to overrule the president, which is a perfect example of how division of power is used to protect the interests of the people.

Madison believes that the concentration of power in the same hands is what he describes as tyranny, meaning those people holding the power will be the law unto themselves and unto others. They may oppress others with all the justification needed.

Conclusion

The language used by Madison in this paper is persuasive. It stands out as one that is meant to convince the people on why there has to be a division of power as well as the need for the congress to work parallel to the senate and the president on the other hand.

His language instills fear to both the majority and the minority by showing them how they can end up suffering if there is no division of power. The people’s interests are represented by the congress at the state level because, in America, which is a big country, power has to be brought close to the people.

The appearance of the Constitution involved hours of discussions and negotiation, and even when it was accomplished, some assigns were sorrowful with it. The assignment of fixing the troubling Confederate administration was not total yet; each province had to approve, or consent, the Constitution. Generally, people were separated into two divisions, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Each of their perspectives is worth regarding, as they equally have sound reasoning.

The Anti-Federalists never desired to ratify the Constitution. Generally, the state, that:

• It gave too much authority to the nationwide administration at the expenditure of the state management.
• There was absolutely no bill of rights.
• The public government could uphold an army during a time of peace.
• The legislature, because of the essential and appropriate section, exerted too much authority.
• The managerial subdivision held too much authority.

Of these criticisms, the lack of a bill of rights was the most efficient. The American citizens had just struggled a war to protect their rights, and they did not desire to intimidate the national administration taking those rights away again. The requirement of a bill of rights was the concentration of the Anti-Federalist movement against approval.

The Federalists, on the other hand, offered replies to all of the Anti-Federalist protests:

• The division of powers into three sovereign stems defended the rights of the people. Each branch symbolizes various components of the people, and as all three branches are equivalent, no one group can suppose manages over another.
• A listing of rights can be a hazardous feature. If the nationwide government is aimed to protect precisely programmed rights, what would stop it from infringing rights other than the listed ones?

Overall, the Federalists were more prearranged in their attempts. By June of 1788, the Constitution was restricted for ratification. To achieve this, the Federalists consented that once the assembly met, it would plan a bill of rights. Fascinatingly, the Bill of Rights was not initially a part of the Constitution, and yet it has been established to be extremely significant to defending the rights of the people. (Elazar, 2001)

Republicanism is the philosophy of overseeing a nation as a republic, with importance on independence, rule of law, accepted power and the civic asset applied by people. Republicanism constantly locates in resistance to nobility, oligarchy, and despotism. More generally, it denotes a political structure that defends freedom, particularly by incorporating a rule of law that can not be randomly ignored by the administration. Much of the researches deal with the matter of what sort of charges and manners by the citizens is essential if the republic is to endure and bloom; the necessity has been in extensive citizen partaking, civic virtue, and resistance to dishonesty.

Supporters of republicanism state that it requires a population that puts a quality on civil virtue and combats corruption. Most researchers squabble that republicanism is mismatched with office owners using public authority for individual achievements. Lots of autocracies have called themselves “republics,” but usually do not defend the rights or freedom of their people. (Heideking, 2005)

References

Elazar, Daniel J. Exploring Federalism. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 2001.

Heideking, JÜrgen, James A. Henretta, and Peter Becker, eds. Republicanism and Liberalism in America and the German States, 1750-1850. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

In his Federalist Papers written in the form of a persuasive essay, Hamilton chooses to refer to the judicial branch as the “least dangerous” branch of the government because of its specific functions. Thus, according to the author, the judicial branch cannot affect the political rights related to the Constitution in contrast to the executive and legislative branches that can influence these rights by certain actions. In this context, the judicial branch can realize its unique function only through providing judgments, without influencing political rights directly.

Still, Hamilton also discusses the consequences of the situation when the judiciary is viewed as weaker than the executive and legislative branches. According to the author, the judicial branch cannot influence the other two branches, but it needs to prove justice in judgments, and it cannot threaten liberty in this case. From this perspective, it is critical to guarantee the separation and independence of the branches in order to prevent affecting liberty negatively.

In his paper, Hamilton further develops the idea of the relationship between the three branches accentuating the necessity for the judicial branch to be independent of the executive and legislative branches. Courts and judges should not be dependent on the impacts of the executive and legislative branches because any kind of the union in this case is associated with the interdependence of the branches on each other, and this aspect can potentially affect the judgment. From this point, Hamilton emphasizes the necessity of avoiding the impact of authorities on judges whose decisions should be regulated by the Constitution and laws in the most independent and unbiased manner. Thus, judges are expected to interpret laws, but they cannot be influenced by the legislative body.

According to Hamilton, the major purpose of the judicial branch is to declare the rule of law and exercise the judgments without performing the will or decision. In this context, the purpose of the judicial branch should not be misunderstood and viewed with reference to the purposes of the executive and legislative branches. Judges need to guarantee that all provisions of the Constitution are realized in the most appropriate and efficient manner, and it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that these principles guide and regulate the work of judges even today.

Discussing the process of judicial selection, Hamilton supports the idea that all judges are expected to perform their roles until their conduct is proper with reference to the concepts of fidelity and integrity, thus, during judges’ “good behavior.” Therefore, they should be selected for life-long or permanent terms. Hamilton accentuates the permanency of judges’ offices because they need constantly develop their qualifications, improve knowledge, and know all rules and precedents in order to perform their roles successfully. Furthermore, being appointed to a life-long position, judges are protected from the impact of political pressures and any type of invasions from the authorities. If judges are appointed periodically and for temporary offices, they cannot demonstrate the same depth of knowledge as other judges, and this practice cannot be viewed as effective. Therefore, Hamilton does not support temporary offices and periodical appointments of judges.

As a result, according to Hamilton, the permanency of judicial positions can guarantee that judges have certain characteristics that are important for them to perform their duties. As it was stated earlier, judges need to have the following qualities and skills: they need to demonstrate the knowledge of rules, laws, and precedents; refer to precedents while discussing cases; avoid being influenced by controversies without analyzing the situation properly; and study all these aspects in order to improve their knowledge during the whole life. As a result, Hamilton claims that only the permanency of judicial offices can provide these professionals with particular opportunities and resources to develop their skills and knowledge.

Introduction

American history witnessed a constant confrontation between the state government and the federal government. American federalism in the United States has been always viewed as an inherent structure comprising legislative, administrative, and judicial bodies. Moreover, some researchers believe that national and state governments were interdependent. On the other hand, there is tangible tendency to treat these two political systems as two opposed and independent phenomena (Vile, M. J. C 3). Hence, it is important to define the main goals and objectives of Federal government what predetermined the rise of Federalism in our time.

Main body

First of all, we should consider the historical background of formation of both political systems. It should be mentioned, that the development of federalism refers to 1780 when the merchants, artisans, and humble workers consider federalism the most powerful political system. The rise of federalist movement was the reaction on the Articles of Confederation as the first attempt of self-governance (Gerston, Larry N 24). Further, the movement enhanced due to the Shays’ Rebellion in 1786 that led to the reconsideration of the Articles of Consideration by the Federal government. As a result, the amendments were succeeded by the creation of the Constitution of the United States, which was further ratified by Federalists. (Gerston, Larry N 40). The Constitution was supported by the Federal Papers written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison, which are considered the most significant documents in the American history since they constitute the official victory of the Federalist movement (Gerston, Larry N 41). The Constitution highlighted the fundamentals of American federalism and testified the domination of the centralization. As it can be view, the problem of centralization and decentralization was of great concern in the course of the whole history and was predetermined by the economic and social situation in the United States.

After the Civil War, the development of federalism was revealed through the emergence of dual federalism and cooperative federalism. The former emphasized the difference between the spheres of federal and state governing as equal powers. In addition, the introduction of this doctrine implied that both the state government and national should not interfere with other authority’s frames. The peculiar feature of the dual federalism is that these opposite powers were regarded as separate independent authorities. (Bardes, Barbara, et al. 93).

Cooperative federalism was a logical development of the federalist strategy. This period is distinguished by the cooperation of the national and state governments while solving complex decisions. The main reason of transition from dual federalism to the cooperative one was the fact that the Supreme Court stopped to pressure the national government being influenced by Roosevelt’s new legislation (Bardes, Barbara, et al. 95). The absolute transfer of power to the national government marked the last resort of the development of federalism. So, the economic and domestic problems of the States were declared to be national problems. Hence, the pattern of federal-state relations was centralized (Dye, Thomas & Zeigler, Harmon 14).

Conclusion

To my mind, there should be a kind of compromise in the power distribution because some problems can be solved at the level of state and the intervention of national authorities is not crucial. However, such problems war, environmental pollution, and national security are likely to be solved by the federal government. Nowadays, there is a tendency of returning power to the states and communities that, in my opinion, is a logical outcome of this historic confrontation.

Works Cited

Bardes, Barbara, Shelley, Mack C., Schnidt, Steffen, W. American Government and Politics Today: The Essentials. US: Cengage Learning, 2008.

Dye, Thomas & Zeigler, Harmon The irony of democracy: an Uncommon Introduction to American Politics.US: Cengage Learning, 2008.

.Gerston, Larry N. American Federalism: a concise introduction. US: M. E. Sharpe, 2007.

Vile, M. J. C. The Structure of American Federalism. London: Oxford University Press, 1961.

The most significant argument presented in the Federalist paper number seventy involves giving the executive absolute power to make it strong and prevent any mischievous encroachment from both external and internal forces. It was presented by Alexander Hamilton on March 15, 1788. In his presentation, Hamilton emphasizes on the need to have an energetic executive over any other arm of government. To him, a vigorous executive defines the qualities of a good government. When absolute authority is vested in the executive, it will be able to carry out its functions properly. The analogy presented in the Federalist paper number seventy formed the basis of the present-day powerful executive in the United States.

It is common knowledge that an American president is the most powerful figure in the world. The paper outlines that anything contrary to a powerful executive that is led by a president is a recipe for a weak government. Hamilton explains in the second paragraph that people apply in their practical life what is written in theory. Therefore, a feeble executive means that the government will be weak, and as such the execution of functions will be bad. The question of whether there is a need for an energetic executive remains inconsequential as all well-wishers who are open-minded will agree that it is the only way the citizens can be served to the fullest. What is significant is to assess the constituents of the energy that should propel a strong executive to a level of becoming very vigorous. The process demands an evaluation of the degree to which the factors of energy can be joined to make sure that the republicans are safe.

The Federalist paper number seventy states that there are four qualities of a strong executive. They include harmony, time, satisfactory support, and proficient powers. Authority without power is useless. The safety of American people can be guaranteed if the executive relies on the service to humanity and having due responsibility that is accountable. Hamilton elaborates that the duty of checking the executive should be left to the legislature. In the distribution of power, the paper quotes the structure of Rome that was divided into two. Absolute power remained in Rome.

Rome could set the policy and agenda for its people while the second arm was left to the small distant institutions that helped in the running of the nation’s affairs. In the American case, the interests of the people will be brought through the legislature where the citizens’ own elected representatives would sit to deliberate on issues. Absolute power cannot be shared by two or more centers. If this happens then, unity will be destroyed because of the wrangles that would emerge. This could come from rivalry, competition, or normal human selfish interests. They may also be expressions of frustrations.

The eighth passage in the article explains why Hamilton feared for a nation whose executive was feeble. Political systems including parties were run in fear and were full divisive politics before the American Revolution. The founders of the nation of America hoped to strike unity of purpose across the entire U.S. They included Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Alexander Hamilton. They, however, did not find this an easy ride as only thirteen states were prepared to take part in the war of the revolution.

Different competing interests from different states and leaders led to this tough journey towards unity. The fight for a united country is what led to Abraham Lincoln declaring war on states such as California that had defied the call for unity. The president had to be powerful to meet the cause of unity. This is captured in the eighth passage when Hamilton salutes the ideology of New York and New Jersey posting the center of power to one solitary entity. This is the ingredient of enhancing unity according to Alexander Hamilton. The act of distributing executive power led to the collapse of Rome.

The emphasis on ensuring that power is vested on one spot is to avoid the pitfalls that are highlighted in passage eleven. The paper identifies that any engagements involving more than one person will likely experience the impact of differing opinions. The situation is very precarious if the different parties are entrusted with a public or state office because the outcome could cause animosity. This will make the authority weak and distract the plans of execution by the feuding parties. Delivery of service in such a case will be impractical as important government functions will be curtailed.

The reoccurrence of such actions could split the nation into factions that oppose each other and the consequences could be violent war. Eventually, the nation may be forced to split because the warring factions could be irreconcilable. The remedy that would avoid all these likely occurrences is to have a strong executive office with absolute powers and a big legislature to check the executive. Up to date, the U.S. has an imperial presidency. What the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans who were the founders of the nation of America fought to meet that is Unity through an energetic executive is now being enjoyed by all Americans.

Overview

This paper will first examine the different issues pertaining to federalism, intergovernmental relations and fragmegration as related to each other. Federalism will be defined and examined from different perspectives in relation to intergovernmental relations. An analysis will also be made in regard to the relationship between intergovernmental relations and fragmegration in the context of federalism. The different structural models used in the creation of government and political interactions will be considered in coming to a conclusion about the importance of federalism. Representation and legislation will be defined and their inter relationships outlined in order to convey the variable importance that they have in the context of politics. The process by which an issue becomes a legislation and law, will be clearly explained. Finally there will be an analysis made of the difference in the theory of Fenno, Dahl and Lowi as compared to the normal text book definitions in regard to representation and legislation.

Introduction

According to Ginsberg, Lowi and Weir (GLW) “the constitution has had its most fundamental influence on American life through federalism. Federalism can be defined as the division of powers and functions between the national government and the state governments” (Ginsberg, Lowi and Weir, 2007). Indeed federalism is defined as a system whereby the country is organized in a way that the government is vested with formal authority over its lands and people by two or more levels of government. The United States is characterized by a federal government system which implies that there is a constitutional provision for the central government and for one or more sub national government that have the authority to make decisions without the need to seek the approval of each other. In a federal system the responsibilities could be shared or divided and such a relationship is very dynamic between the national and state governments in being subject to change by way of judicial interpretations as also through political, representational and operational means. Federalism has enabled governments to solve dilemmas related to the achievement of national unity and integrity while at the same time enabling and preserving independence for states in regard to socio economic, religious, ethnic and regional diversity. The terms federalism and intergovernmental relations are at most times believed to be interchangeable, but some theorists are of the opinion that there is a difference between the two. Federalism is purely concerned with including political, hierarchical, jurisdictional, legal and constitutional concepts. In this regard, the main institutional actors influencing the federal set up are the judicial, legislative and executive branches, as also the states and bureaucracy. Additionally, the political, fiscal and regulatory processes have influenced the connection between the states and the national government. In contrast, intergovernmental relations are seen to be more administrative, fiscal, functional, multi tiered and encompassing in focusing on the core issues. There is also tendency for them to be more informal and flexible. The concept of intergovernmental relations implies association between government officers as also their preoccupation, actions and attitudes with financial matters.

Intergovernmental relations play a very important role in fiscal federalism. With the beginning of the era of cooperative federalism, the system of federal grants vastly impacted the intergovernmental relations since more money was given to states by way of grants. Currently most of the federal grants are for four differing functions; education, employment, income security and health. The courts have played a very important role in determining the extent and nature of intergovernmental relations. This is because the courts have to often decide between constitutional interpretations of national authority as against state government claims of the federal government encroaching upon their state rights as provided by the constitution. In this context the Supreme Court has been playing an important role in the growth of national authority in regard to the interpretation of the constitution.

Fragmegration as related to intergovernmental relations implies the changes introduced by stretching the well established concepts over towards a new phenomenon. Scholars in this field have made application of the move towards sharing of power among states as also within them. Political decentralization within the states has begun to generate new terms and concepts such as polycentric governance, multi tiered governance and multi level governance. There is also the prevalence of large numbers of jurisdictions each of which are shared by groups of citizens. There are many levels of such jurisdiction in conceiving authority over specific regional and local areas to facilitate provision of goods and services. Such works that extend the polycentric governance into the intergovernmental relations between the federal and state governments are referred to as fragmegration.

Intergovernmental relations are characterized by concurrent tendencies to devolve and centralize. In the US, the decentralization philosophy that came into being during the Reagan administration brought about added authority for state and local governments. Increased flexibility for state governments has resulted with the introduction of block grant programs for welfare and economic development activities, and this combined with the increased authority of the Supreme Court resulted in what has come to be called as the rebirth of federalism. State Supreme Court decisions, legislative action and home rule have brought about consistent increase in autonomy for states. Additionally, local governments have also acknowledged higher levels of cooperation amongst themselves in combating matters that cross political borders. Some policy areas have seen a shift towards centralization. Education has come to be given more importance at the national level during the recent past since higher federal funding in this function has promised more federal involvement at the national level. However, the given trends demonstrate some level of conflict as existing in intergovernmental relations. Although devolution has taken place in most states, some of them continue to be plagued with conflict within their systems. But the relationship between devolution and centralization will continue to grow in the near future at both the state and national levels.

Main body

Representation in politics means the process with which political power is isolated from a given set of members of a political group and given to a select few for a specific time period. Such representation is in the context of referring to representative democracies in which the officials who are duly elected, speak nominally about the constituents in the specific bodies. Most often it is only citizens who are given such representation rights by way of voting rights in the government. Representation can be done on the basis of population and area, but in most cases it refers to descriptive representation whereby representatives are chosen on a symbolic and passive basis. The idea is to elect candidates in a democratic set up so that they represent gender and ethnic constituencies as also minority groups, instead of the population at large. This embodies the basic principle that an elected body should reflect a representative sample of the people that they represent.

Legislation refers to law that is enacted and promulgated by a governing body or legislature. It could refer to one law or to collective bodies of laws. A single law is normally referred to as a statute. Until an item of legislation is to become law, it is known as a bill and continues to be known as legislation while it is under consideration of the legislative authority. Legislation proposes to bring about authorization, regulation, sanctioning, granting and restricting in regard to the several matters that are put up before the authority for enactment as law. The means with which representation is brought about in forming representative bodies and authorities have also to be brought about by the due process of law starting from legislation and then on to become a matter of law. The representative matters have to be proposed for legislation by the executive or a member of the Congress before they can be passed by Congress.

Conclusion

Through the works of Fenno, Dahl and Lowi, the analysis of representation and legislation pertains to the several other forms that they respectively take in defining the job of the representative in being a delegate for his constituents in keeping with the ambiguous and conflicting views of the state or district in Congress. Members of the Congress are considered as trustees who represent their constituents in exercise of their judgment of the interest of the state or district. It is difficult to be an effective trustee and a good delegate at the same time. The authors see a representative as a politico who mainly believes in emphasizing on issues that are vital for his constituents and those that he represents. Hence it becomes a dilemma for many members of Congress constituents to agree to specific issues as regard to when they should act as delegates in exercising their own discretion. In this context, Congress can be taken as being a trustee or a delegate of the country. As a delegate Congress has to bring in enactment that reflects public opinion which is nationwide. As a trustee Congress will have to introduce a policy which is in keeping with its own judgment about the ultimate interest of the country, irrespective of the imbalance in regard to the public opinion at the given time.

The Congress is always in the process of serving the two purposes of law making and representation. Members of the senate and House represent and work for individual states or districts, but they have to collectively act in making the law. Issues that are divisive entail collective action by way of compromise and bargaining amongst the Senate and the House as also amongst the members of each house. If a compromise is to be worked out a few members will have to back track from their commitment to their respective districts and states. It is the courage in the legislative politics which will make a compromise possible and such a process can lead to ugly and messy situations such as Congress bashing which is considered to be common in the politics of America. It is thus essential to be adequately evaluated in understanding the conflicting expectations in regard to the politicians who are the representatives of the different institutions.

The Congress does play a constructive role in passing bills that provide for the grant of essential rights for women, environmental protection, protection to minorities, disabled and children, reduction of barriers in regard to voter registrations, higher funds for college students etc. Such actions enable representatives to cater to the requirements of their districts and states and can garner further credibility for themselves. Despite being required to perform tasks of national and international importance, the Congress becomes a complex place in view of the several committees, parties and procedures that have been built in the process over the last two centuries. It is however frustrating to see that the legislations are often accompanied with several controversies, bargaining and partisanship. The widespread use of wheeling and rhetoric are an integral part of such legislative politics that takes within its purview all representatives thus imposing a challenge that is directly related to the welfare of the masses.

References

Ginsberg, Lowi and Weir “We the People”, 1997, 6^th Edition, W. W. Norton.