When the constitution was framed, our founding fathers chose the path of a federal system of government, instead of a unitary system. This system meant that the government would have many levels or layers, such as for cities, states, and the country as a whole. However, the nation's government, the federal government, was not to have complete sovereignty over the state governments. This allowed each form of government to have it's own responsibilities and duties, and would also prevent tyranny later down the road. This article about universal health care shows that the federal government does have the power of the states to pass a law ensuring people with health care. But it also shows that, during the Clinton Administration, the people had the power to come together to halt his efforts towards universal healthcare. This shows that, though the federal government does have great authority, it is not completely in control. It does not have complete sovereignty.
PROP 8 !
This article about Proposition 8 is another great example of federalism in the US and the balance of powers. Proposition 8 was an amendment to California's own constitution, banning same-sex marriages. It was not the responsibility of the federal government. However, when protests arose and people greatly disputed the proposition, the federal government became involved. Review of the constitutionality of this proposition went to the Supreme Court. The state government of California has the power and authority to pass amendments to it's own constitution, without needing the help or permission of the federal government. However, when needed, the federal government has the power to intervene, and the Supreme Court has the authority to review the constitutionality of the amendment.
Hey--the second example is good. The whole debate over gay marriage directly relates to federalism due to the requirement in the Constitution that the states give full faith and credit to contracts across state lines. Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990s which exempted the states from recognizing gay marriages from one state to another, but its still a very big federalism issue and one that is decided--as so many are--in the Courts. The first example is a bit harder to link to federalism--at least the way you have pitched it. That article relates more to separation of powers and checks and balances. The president wanted one thing, Congress another, the president didn't get his way. That's a great example of checks and balances at work. The president clearly hadn't made his case strongly enough to the American people to get them to buy into his plan. I remember that so clearly. It was a big misstep for his administration and a major set back for Hillary as well.
ReplyDelete