Third Way: A Rebirth of Federalism May be Underway
WIN-Initiative
A crucial part of the of the debate that helped define American politics pertains to the relationship between states and the federal government. Conservatives, first Democrats and then Republicans, traditionally argue that initiatives should be done at the state and local level- while more liberal and progressive thinkers, along with activists typically dispute that more actions should be done at the Federal level. Due to what many states on the east and west coast considered a dysfunctional federal response, many states created interstate compacts or alliances to coordinate responses. This has prompted some observers to note that this is the beginning of a new form of federalism.
American federalism is based on what the U.S. Constitution outlines for the federal and state governments. The Tenth Amendment explicitly states, “[that] 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.” While Section Eight of the Preamble of the Constitution states that the federal government and Congress have the power to “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” These clauses in the Constitution mean that American federalism is based on the idea that the federal government regulates the relationship between the states, and also that the states are the primary form of government.
Supreme Court Justice Brandeis famously proclaimed that the states are “laboratories of democracy” where new political and economic experiments can be implemented before going nationwide.
Yet many have argued that federalism is not working. If the states are the primary form of governance in the U.S., then theoretically, Americans should be focused on local and state affairs either as much or even more than on federal politics. Yet polls and studies regularly depict that Americans are ignorant of the workings of their state governments. In fact, one in three Americans is not sure who their governor is. That is problematic for federalism since it means that 33% of Americans do not even know the chief executive and most visible members of their state’s government. It gets even worse when Americans are asked who their local legislator is, with only one in five respondents knowing who their local state representative is.
Polls and studies have shown that the way Americans vote in local and state elections are largely a result of their opinions on the president and national issues. In an ideal federal system, Californians and Virginians would vote for state politicians and governors as a reflection of political developments in the state, not the nation as a whole. This has prompted people to deride the idea of a “McPolitics,” which has popped up, wiping out local politics and parties and refocusing the conversation away from local issues to national ones. This is problematic since the majority of government workers and government services are done through local and state governments. If Americans vote based on national issues instead of local ones, the accountability of local politicians suffer. This phenomenon has also been tied to the overall decline of media coverage and journalists, who zero in on state and local politics. The lack of visibility of state and local issues and politics has left a severely negative impact on politics. This leads to the distancing and alienation of the populace from the government. It also leads to a lack of accountability for local and state governments. The absence of media and voting means that incumbents are allowed to get away with higher levels of corruption due to the lack of accountability, which is paired with declines in the quality of state and local politicians, as fewer incumbents continue running. This has led scholars like David N. Schleicher of Yale Law School, to argue that the current state of American federalism is one that is both “dysfunctional” and “broken.”
Yet, while Americans are largely distrustful and disgusted with federal politics, they are largely confident and supportive of state developments. Around 70% (Do not begin sentence with 70%) of respondents to a Johns Hopkins University study believe that their state government is doing a better job than their federal government. Though Americans appear to be mostly ignorant of the politics of their states, clear political developments do occur at the state level. The nation was able to see this in 2018 due to the unpopularity of incumbent GOP state governors, Democrats Laura Kelly (Is She a Gov.? If so, then-Democratic Gov.’s Laura Kelly and Matt Bevin) and Matt Bevin were able to take the Governors’ Mansions in Kansas and Kentucky. Kentucky was the most exciting part of this development since Bevin lost despite Trump’s popularity. Also, attributing to the fascination aspect is the fact that Republicans won the other statewide offices.
Similarly, three of the most popular governors in the country are the GOP governors of Maryland, Massachusetts and Vermont, which are three heavily blue states. This shows that Americans do, to a certain degree, pay attention to local matters. While Americans are skeptical of the federal government and vote along federal lines, they still regularly interact and see the work of state governments daily. DMVs, schools, police, roads, firefighters and even welfare programs are conducted through the state and local governments — and even liberals and progressives who are historically suspicious of federalism have come to appreciate it as a way to preserve various environmental standards, labor standards and other liberal policies in the face of the Trump administration’s attacks on them.
On April 13, 2020, California, Oregon and Washington announced a pact in which the three Western states would coordinate resources and responses to the coronavirus pandemic. On April 27, Colorado and Nevada also joined the pact. John Cassidy of the New Yorker dubbed this the “Western States Pact.”
On the east coast, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island also announced the formation of an interstate pact. Interstate pacts are not a new concept in the U.S. —— In fact, the Library of Congress notes that they exist and are legal. They should be viewed as contracts between states that Congress would need to approve of providing federal approval is required. These pacts include in-state-tuition for state universities of in-state residents and neighboring states, and also include the setting up of medical school campuses in states with low populations. However, a pact for such an extensive program, such as the coordination of a way to open up the economies of multiple states safely, has never been initiated before. Fulfillment of such a feat would require not just coordination but would also require the construction of a coordinated political infrastructure, which crosses state borders. There is no reason for any of this to terminate when the pandemic ends. Many states have small economies and populations, and, in addition, are incredibly dependent on the federal government to sustain themselves. There is no reason for these states to not create interstate compacts with nearby states that are culturally similar to coordinate their economies in the future. The Western states are already tied together not just by geography but by a common culture that they developed as frontier states. That bond, in tandem with strong cultural ties to Mexico and Canada, creates a relationship that cannot be replicated.
The Northeastern states also share similar cultural values, which they developed as the oldest states and colonies. Just as they are coordinating during the pandemic to figure out when to open up, they could also continue to meet to coordinate public services, advocate for regional issues in Washington and even promote their shared cultural identity when the pandemic ends.
Some advocates of reforming federalism may grudgingly admit that the recent crisis has been a godsend. Gov.’s Andrew Cuomo and Gavin Newsom have gained the attention of their states while simultaneously asserting their political powers in contrast and in opposition to President Donald Trump and the federal government. This can be seen when Cuomo derided the president for “[declaring] himself a king” while Newsome declared that the Californian “nation-state” would operate independently of the federal government. This has forced attention back onto the state government and its governors. This can mean that a possible renaissance of federalism and state governments is possible. This could mean that the trend of “McPolitics,” which subsumed state and local politics, could be reversed. It could also mean that this is the birth of a new form of federalism, which is based around regional interstate compacts that we have never seen before in the U.S.
