Federalism: Crash Course Government and Politics #4

In which Craig Benzine teaches you about federalism, or the idea that in the United States, power is divided between the national government and the 50 state governments. Craig will teach you about how federalism has evolved over the history of the US, and what powers are given to the federal government, and what stuff the states control on their own. And he punches an eagle, which may not surprise you at all.

Produced in collaboration with PBS Digital Studios: http://youtube.com/pbsdigitalstudios

Support is provided by Voqal: http://www.voqal.org

Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/YouTubeCrashCourse
Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/TheCrashCourse
Tumblr - http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com
Instagram - http://instagram.com/thecrashcourse

(soft music)

- Hi, I'm Craig, and this is

Crash Course Government and Politics

and today we're gonna talk about

a fundamental concept in
American government, federalism.

(eagle screeching)

I'm sorry.

I'm not sorry, you're not
even endangered anymore.

Federalism is a little confusing

because it includes the word federal,

as in federal government,

which is what we use to
describe the government

of the United States as a whole.

Which is kind of the
opposite of what we mean

when we say federalism.

Confused?
Google it.

This video will probably come up

and then just watch this video.

Or, just continue watching this video.

(upbeat music)

So what is federalism?

Most simply, it's the
idea that in the U.S.,

governmental power is divided between

the government of the United States

and the government of
the individual states.

The government of the U.S.,
the national government,

is sometimes called the federal government

while the state governments

are just called the state governments.

This is because technically,

the U.S. can be considered
a federation of states

but this means different
things to different people.

For instance, federation of
states means ham sandwich to me.

I'll have one federation
of states, please,

side of tater tots.

Thank you.
I'm kinda dumb.

In a federal system, the
national government takes care

of some things like for example,
war with other countries

and delivering the mail.

While the state government
takes care of other things

like driver's license, hunter's
license, barber's license,

dentist's license, license
to kill, that's James Bond

and that's in England I
hope states don't do that.

Pretty simple, right?
Maybe not.

For one thing, there are
some aspects of government

that are handled by both the state

and the national government.

Taxes, Americans' favorite
government activity,

are an example.

There are federal taxes and state taxes.

But it gets even more complicated

because there are different
types of federalism

depending on what period
in American history

you're talking about.

Ugh, Stan, why is history so confusing?

Ugh, Stan, you gonna tell me?

Can you talk Stan?

Basically though, there are
two main types of federalism.

Dual federalism, which has
nothing to do with Aaron Burr,

usually refers to the
period of American history

that stretches from the
founding of our great nation

until the New Deal.

And cooperative federalism,

which has been the rule since the 1930s.

Let's start with an easy one
and look at dual federalism,

in the thought bubble.

From 1788 until 1937,
the U.S. basically lived

under a regime of dual federalism,

which meant government
power was strictly divided

between the state and
national governments.

Notice, I didn't say separated

because I don't want you
to confuse federalism

with separation of powers.

Don't do it!

With dual federalism,
there are some things

that only the federal government does

and some things that only
the state governments do.

This is sometimes called jurisdiction.

The national government
had jurisdiction over

internal improvements like
interstate roads and canals,

subsidies to the states, and tariffs,

which are taxes on imports

and thus fall under the general
heading of foreign policy.

The national government
also owns public lands

and regulates patents
which need to be national

for them to offer protection for inventors

in all the states.

And because you want a
silver dollar in Delaware

to be worth the same as a
silver dollar in Georgia,

the national government
also controls currency.

The state government had
control over property laws,

inheritance laws, commercial
laws, banking laws,

corporate laws, insurance, family law,

which means marriage and divorce.

Morality, stuff like public
lewdness and drinking

keeps me in check.

Public health, education,
criminal laws including

determining what is a crime

and how crimes are prosecuted.

Land use, which includes
water and mineral rights,

elections, local government,

and licensing of
professions and occupations,

basically what's required to drive a car

or open a bar or become a barber

or become James Bond.

So, under dual federalism,

the state government has
jurisdiction over a lot more

than the national government.

These powers over health,
safety, and morality

are sometimes call police power

and usually belong to the states.

Because of the strict division

between the two types of government,

dual federalism is sometimes
called layer cake federalism.

Delicious.

And it's consistent with the
tradition of limited government

that many Americans hold very dear.

Thanks thought bubble.

Now, some of you might be wondering,

"Craig, where does the national government

"get the power to do anything
that has to do with states?"

Yeah, well, off the top of my head,

the U.S. Constitution in Article One

Section Eight Clause Three

gives Congress the power
"to regulate commerce

"with foreign nations and
among the several states

"and with the Indian tribes."

This is what's known
as the Commerce Clause

and the way that it's been interpreted

forms the basis of dual federalism

and cooperative federalism.

For most of the 19th Century,

the Supreme Court decided
that almost any attempt

by any government, federal or state,

to regulate state economic activity

would violate the Commerce Clause.

This basically meant that
there was very little

regulation of business at all.

Freedom!

And this is how things stood,

with the U.S. following a
system of dual federalism

with very little government regulation

and the national government not doing much

other than going to war,

buying or conquering enormous
amounts of territory,

and delivering the mail.

Then, the Great Depression happened

and Franklin Roosevelt and Congress

enacted the New Deal,
which changed the role

of the federal government in a big way.

The New Deal brought us
cooperative federalism

where the national
government encourages states

and localities to pursue
nationally-defined goals.

The main way that the
federal government does this

is through dolla dolla bills, y'all.

Money, is what I'm saying.

Stan, can I make it rain?

Yeah?
Alright, I'm doing it.

I happen to have cash
in my hand right now.

Oh yeah, take my federal money, states.

I'm regulatin' ya.

I'm a regulator.

This money that the federal
government gives to the state

is called a grant-in-aid.

Grants-in-aid can work like a carrot

encouraging a state to
adopt a certain policy

or work like a stick when
the federal government

withholds funds if the state doesn't do

what the national government wants.

Grants-in-aid are usually
called categorical

because they're given to states

for a particular purpose
like transportation

or education or alleviating poverty.

There are two types of
categorical grants-in-aid,

formula grants and project grants.

Under a formula grant,

a state gets aid in a
certain amount of money

based on a mathematical formula.

The best example of this is the old way

Welfare was given in the
U.S. under the program called

Aid to Families with
Dependent Children, AFDC.

States got a certain amount
of money for every person

who was classified as poor.

The more poor people a state had,

the more money it got.

Project grants require
states to submit proposals

in order to receive aid.

The states compete for a
limited pool of resources.

Nowadays, project grants are
more common than formula grants

but neither is as popular as block grants,

which the government gives out Lego blocks

and then you build stuff with the Legos.

It's a good time.

No, no, where the national government

gives a state a huge chunk of money

for something big like infrastructure,

which is made with concrete
and steel, not Legos.

And the state is allowed to figure out

how to spend the money.

The basic type of cooperative federalism

is the carrot stick type,

which is sometimes called
marble cake federalism

because it mixes up the
state and federal governments

in ways that makes it
impossible to separate the two.

Federalism, it's such a culinary delight.

The key to this is, you guessed it,

dolla dolla bills, y'all.
Money.

But there's another aspect
of cooperative federalism

that's really not so cooperative

and that's regulated federalism.

Under regulated federalism,

the national government
sets up regulations

and rules that the states must follow.

Some examples of these
rules, also called mandates,

are EPA regulations,
civil rights standards,

and the rules set up by the
Americans with Disabilities Act.

Sometimes the government
gives the states money

to implement the rules
but sometimes it doesn't

and they must comply anyway.

That's called an unfunded mandate,

or as I like to call it an un-fun mandate

'cause no money, no fun.

A good example of this is OSHA regulations

that employers have to follow.

States don't like these

and Congress tried to
do something about them

with the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act, or UMRA,

but it hasn't really worked.

In the early 21st Century,

Americans are basically
living under a system

of cooperative federalism
with some areas of activity

that are heavily regulated.

This is a stretch from the original idea

that federalism will keep
the national government small

and have most government
functions belong to the states.

If you follow American politics,

and I know you do,

this small government
ideal should sound familiar

because it's the bedrock principle

of many conservatives and
libertarians in the U.S.

As conservatives made
major political inroads

after the 1970s, a new
concept of federalism,

which was actually kind of
an old concept of federalism,

became popular.

It was called, surprise, New Federalism

and it was popularized by
Presidents Nixon and Reagan.

Just to be clear, it's
called New Federalism,

not Surprise New Federalism.

New Federalism basically means

giving more power to the states

and this has been done in three ways.

First, block grants
allow states discretion

to decide what to do with federal money.

And what's a better way
to express your power

than spending money?

Or not spending money, as the case may be.

Another form of New
Federalism is devolution,

which is the process of giving
state and local governments

the power to enforce regulations,

devolving power from the
national to the state level.

Finally, some courts have picked up

the cause of New Federalism through cases

based on the 10th Amendment, which states,

"The powers not delegated
to the United States

"by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states,

"are reserved to the states
respectively, or to the people."

The idea that some powers,

like those police powers
I talked about before,

are reserved by the states has been used

to put something of a brake
on the Commerce Clause.

So, as you can see, where
we are with federalism today

is kind of complicated.

Presidents Reagan, George
H. W. Bush, and Clinton

seem to favor New
Federalism and block grants.

But George W. Bush seemed to push back

towards regulated
federalism with laws like

No Child Left Behind and the creation of

the Department of Homeland Security.

It's pretty safe to say that
we're gonna continue to live

under a regime of cooperative federalism

with a healthy dose of
regulation thrown in.

But many Americans feel
that the national government

is too big and expensive

and not what the framer's wanted.

If history is any guide,

a system of dual federalism
with most of the government

in the hands of the states

is probably not gonna happen.

For some reason, it's really difficult

to convince institutions to give up powers

once they've got them.

I'm never giving up this power.

Thanks for watching,
I'll see you next week.

Crash Course Government and Politics

is produced in association
with PBS Digital Studios.

Support for Crash Course U.S.
Government comes from Voqal.

Voqal supports nonprofits
that use technology and media

to advance social equity.

Learn more about their
mission and initiatives

at voqal.org.

Crash Course is made with the
help of these nice people.

Thanks for watching.

You didn't help make this
video at all, did you?

Nope, but you did get
people to keep watching

until the end 'cause
you're an adorable dog.