Dual vs. Cooperative Federalism by Jeni Liu on Prezi

Dual Vs Cooperative Federalism — Sutree

Compare Contrast and Define Dual and Cooperative federalism

rules by enumerated powers only
National government has only limited purposes
Each government unit -- national and state -- are sovereign in their own spheres
the relationship between state and national governments are marked by tension.
Cooperative Federalism
Marble Cake Federalism

a federal system with considerable sharing of powers among national, state, and local governments
Dual Federalism
a theory about the proper relationship between government and the states portraying the states as powerful components of the federal government -- nearly equal to national government.

Primary importance - States rights ; reserving all rights not specifically given by constitution to the national government

Dual vs.

Dual Federalism Vs Cooperative Federalism;

b. Example: Reagan's attempt to consolidate categorical grants; Congress's cooperation in name only Categorical grants constitute by far the largest proportion of federal grants-in-aid. In 1991, there were 478 separate "categories," which amounted to nearly 90 percent of all federal aid to state and local authorities.

There are other concepts of federalism that help describe the complicated relationships between the national and state governments. Judicial federalism involves the struggle between the national and state governments over the relative constitutional powers of each, and over key constitutional provisions including the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. With its power of judicial review, the Supreme Court is the arbiter of what the Constitution means on various questions, including federalism. Chief Justice John Marshall defended a national-supremacy view of the Constitution in the 1819 case of McCulloch v. Maryland. In that case the Supreme Court expanded the powers of Congress through a broad interpretation of its "necessary and proper" powers, and reaffirmed national supremacy by striking down Maryland's attempt to tax the Bank of the U.S.

Not all judicial decisions favor national power. In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, for example, the court invalidated federal law that required local police to conduct background checks on all gun purchasers. The court ruled that the law violated the Tenth Amendment. Writing for the five-to-four majority, Justice Antonin Scalia declared: "The Federal government may neither issue directives requiring the states to address particular problems, nor command the states' officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a Federal regulatory program.... Such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty."

Fiscal federalism involves the offer of money from the national government to the states in the form of grants to promote national ends such as public welfare, environmental standards, and educational improvements. Until 1911, federal grants were used only to support agricultural research and education. With the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1916, which legalized the federal income tax, the national government gained a significant source of revenue that it used to shape national policy in a variety of new policy areas.

Categorical grants, in which the national government provides money to the states for specific purposes, became a major policy tool of the national government during the New Deal era, and expanded rapidly during the 1960s' Great Society. But state and local officials began to criticize this method of national support because of the costly application and implementation procedures. They also complained that it was difficult to adapt the grants to local needs.

Beginning in the mid 1960s, block grants, which combined several categorical grants in broad policy areas into one general grant, became increasingly popular. States prefer block grants because they allow state officials to adapt the grants to their particular needs. Congress, however, is reluctant to use block grants because they loosen Congress's control over how the money is spent.

Revenue sharing was developed during the Nixon administration as a way to provide monies to states with no strings attached. Using statistical formulas to account for differences among states, the national government provided billions of dollars to the states until the program was abolished in 1986.
There are several pros and cons associated with U.S.-style federalism. Some advantages include a greater degree of local autonomy, more avenues for citizens to participate, and more checks and balances against concentrations of power. Some disadvantages include increased complexity of government that can produce duplication and inefficiency, and increased legal disputes between levels of government.