(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.