Federalism and the Strong Central Government

Reply to Steven and Charles

Steven

Is the idea of overlapping systems of government consistent with or contrary to principles of federalism? You bring up the point about fusion centers being an example of Deil’s 3rd Model of IGR. This is an interesting point that really makes me think deeply about overlapping government and whether it is consistent with or contrary to principles of federalism. In a federal system of government, power is shared between a central government and smaller divisions, such as states or provinces. This division of power is intended to provide checks and balances, ensuring that no one group has too much control (Gordon et al., 2020). The idea of overlapping systems of government, where different levels of government have authority over the same area, is therefore consistent with the principle of federalism. In fact, it would seem that this type of arrangement can be seen as a way to further enhance the checks and balances within the federal system. By ensuring that no one level of government has complete control, overlapping systems of government can help to prevent abuse of power and ensure that decisions are made in the best interests of the people (Boudreault, 2020).

And yet, just as in any jungle there is one dominant animal—i.e., a king of the jungle—I think the same thing is true in government: there is one government that holds greater influence than others; which ultimately, I think, undermines the idea of federalism. I think this is the problem with fusion centers—they represent a great concentration of information and data in a non-transparent web of bureaucracy that has not ostensible system of accountability to the public—and, moreover, it suggests that a central government exists that oversees all things, regardless of local or state governments. In my mind this is not overlapping but dominance, and it goes against the Bible: “Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression” (Isaiah 10:1).

References

Boudreault, J. (2020). Flexible and cooperative federalism: distinguishing the two

approaches in the interpretation and application of the division of powers. National Journal of Constitutional Law, 40(1), 1-35.

Gordon, S. H., Huberfeld, N., & Jones, D. K. (2020, May). What federalism means for

the US response to coronavirus disease 2019. In JAMA Health Forum (Vol. 1, No. 5, pp. e200510-e200510). American Medical Association.

Charles

There is one important line from your presentation that I think gets to the heart of the problem of federalism: it does not really ensure checks and balances but rather undermines independent systems of government in favor of a hierarchical system in which there is one overarching, ruling government—i.e., a central government. The line in presentation that makes me think so is this: “The federal government exploits opportunities at the expense of other governments. The situation is evident in the lack of sharing administrative strategies; instead, the federal government values a co-opted relationship” and it is based on the article by McGuire (2006). Yet Kincaid and Stenberg (2011) raise similar questions, as you note.

In a federal system of government, power is divided between a central government and various regional governments. This arrangement often leads to conflict between the different levels of government, as each jockeys for more power. However, in most cases, the central government eventually emerges as the dominant force. There are a number of reasons for this trend. First, the central government usually controls the military, which gives it a significant advantage in any power struggle. In addition, the central government typically has a wider tax base than the regional governments, allowing it to mobilize more resources. Finally, the central government often enjoys greater popular support than the regional governments, giving it a mandate to exercise its authority. As a result, in my opinion, federalism often leads to a dominant central government. And I think that is a point McGuire and Kincaid and Stenberg all seem to be making. It is definitely one that you touch upon in your presentation to some degree, and I feel we should discuss it more in depth.