National Election Cycles and the Intermittent Political Safeguards of Federalism

Scholars have challenged the notion of "political safeguardsof federalism" in a large and well-developed body of work onthe use of coercive policy tools by the federal government.This study suggests, however, that there may be some utilityin re-examining the political factors that help to constrainthe growth of national power. Specifically, it argues that theneed to win votes from subnational constituencies makes nationallawmakers less supportive of mandates, preemptions, and taxsanctions during election cycles and, thus, provides an intermittentsafeguard of state authority. It tests and finds evidence forhypotheses related to that general argument in analyses of thepassage of coercive federalist policies over the last thirtyyears.     

The State of U.S. Federalism: 1998-1999

In 1998–1999, changing federalism in the United Statesmeant that states have greater discretion in some areas of socialpolicy while Congress has asserted greater influence over issuesof culture and crime. Despite the rhetoric about decisions beingbest made by states and localities, Congress continues to takeon new areas, such as health privacy. In the meantime, the U.S.Supreme Court's sustained focus on issues of federalism intensified,with states' rights continuing to receive emphasis, even thoughthe Court upheld federal power in selected cases and refusedto sanction state actions in others.     

The State of U.S. Federalism, 1999-2000

Federalism has rarely been a key national campaign issue, andthe presidential campaign of 2000 was no exception. Althoughthe candidates talked of a key state-local issue—education—itwas in the context of the popular concern over the quality ofschools, rather than federalism issues of governmental responsibilityfor education. However, one aspect of federalism was evidentin the presidential campaign. The first president of the newmillennium may get a chance to name at least one U.S. SupremeCourt justice. Given the slim 5–4 majorities on most federalismcases, the appointment or appointments could be pivotal. Meanwhile,in the Congress and state Capitols, technology and globalizationissues forced a rethinking of traditional intergovernmentalfiscal and regulatory functions.     

Sino-U.S. Decoupling: The Roles of U.S. Congress

Journal of Chinese Political Science - The Sino-U.S. relations tumbled during the Trump Administration. The talk of decoupling permeated the decision-making circle in Washington D.C. Many factors...     

The State of U.S. Federalism, 2000-2001: Continuity in Crisis

Despite the 2000 presidential-election crisis, basic continuityprevailed in American federalism, including survival of theelectoral college and furtherance of the more recent shift offederal policymaking from places to persons during today's eraof coercive or regulatory federalism. The year revealed theenduring salience of political parties and the prominent roleof interest groups in the politics of federalism, as well asthe ways in which the federal system shapes, and is shaped by,policy debates. The U.S. Supreme Court continued its state-friendlydecision-making while Congress continued to preempt state authority,attach new conditions to federal aid, federalize criminal law,and nationalize power even while giving state and local governmentsmore administrative discretion. The year also illustrated thedeclining impact of federal aid on state-local revenues comparedto the increasing fiscal impact of the federal government'ssubstantive, monetary, and fiscal policies.     

Federalism and U.S. Water Policy: Lessons for the Twenty-First Century

This article traces five historical streams of water policyin the United States, revealing the strain and stresses of intergovernmentalrelations pertaining to water resource management. It findsthat water policy is increasingly characterized by pragmaticfederalism emphasizing collaborative partnerships, adaptablemanagement strategies, and problem and process orientation.The evolving nature of federal-state relations, characterizedby expanding federal authorities and increased state capacity,coupled with a rise of local watershed groups and greater ecologicalconcern, calls for improved coordination. Yet challenges resultingfrom policy fragmentation and ecosystem complexity remain. Continuedcalls for greater integration will likely be heard as federal-staterelations continue to evolve.     

Bottom-Up Federalism: The Diffusion of Antismoking Policies from U.S. Cities to States

Studies of policy diffusion often focus on the horizontal spread of enactments from one state to another, paying little or no attention to the effects of local laws on state-level adoptions. For example, scholars have not tested whether local policy adoptions make state action more likely (through a snowball effect) or less likely (through a pressure valve effect). This study conducts the first comprehensive analysis of vertical policy diffusion from city governments to state governments, while simultaneously examining the influence of state-to-state and national-to-state diffusion. Focusing on three different types of antismoking laws, we find evidence that policies do bubble up from city governments to state governments. State politics are crucial to this relationship, however, as local-to-state diffusion is contingent on the level of legislative professionalism and the strength of health advocates in the state.     

Federalism Outcomes and Ideological Preferences: The U.S. Supreme Court and Preemption Cases

The record of the U.S. Supreme Court in decisions affectingfederal-state relations has been one of inconsistency betweenstates' rights and national supremacy. This inconsistency hasperplexed both legal and political science scholars who havehad great difficulty placing decision-making regarding federalismoutcomes by the Court in any sort of theoretical context. Contraryto much conventional wisdom, ideological preferences do notautomatically translate into federalism outcomes. We extendmodels of judicial decision-making in political environmentsby including state policy. State policy outcomes may be eithermore liberal or more conservative than the policy would be underfederal control. Thus, the ideological preferences of the justicesmay contradict their preferences toward nationalism or statesrights. Testing the model using 94 preemption cases, we findthat individual justices and most Courts are willing to sacrificetheir federalism values in the pursuit of some other policygoal. This finding has implications for both the federalismliterature and strategic models of Court behavior, as well asfor cases the Court is currently reviewing.     

U.S.-China Space Cooperation: Balancing Act between the U.S. Congress and President

There are a growing number of U.S. space scientists and managers calling for reinitiating cooperation with China in space. It is well-known that investigations of the U.S. Congress into various allegations involving China have resulted in a series of laws curtailing space cooperation between these two countries. By surveying the concurrent political developments within the United States in the 1980s and 1990s, this article attempts to reveal the domestic compulsions that propelled changes in the U.S. space policy towards China. The fundamental impetus is the power struggle and differences between the U.S. president and Congress in their perception of U.S. economic interests and national security in the context of space technology that strained these relations. Recent U.S. presidents who inherited this situation added to the discourse based on their own perceptions about outer space and China. These perceptions either found congruence with the policy of the U.S. Congress or led to finding ways to circumvent its legal restrictions. Based on these developments, it is concluded that the view of the U.S. president has alternated between necessary, desirable, and objectionable on the issue of U.S.-China space cooperation, and the U.S. Congress has thus shifted from supporting to restricting and then legally banning cooperation.     

The State of American Federalism, 2005: Federalism Resurfaces in the Political Debate

After several years during which federalism was rarely a prominentor explicit issue in political debates, it was in several waysthrust into the public consciousness in 2005. It was not thatthe president or Congress ceased sacrificing state and localinterests to substantive policy goals, as shown by the costlyREAL ID Act, stringent new federal requirements in the TemporaryAid to Needy Families reauthorization, and congressional interventionin the Terri Schiavo case. However, Hurricane Katrina, and particularlythe delayed and ineffective intergovernmental response, generatedsubstantial debate about the appropriate federal role in disasterrelief. In addition, state and local governmental oppositionto the No Child Left Behind Act intensified and generated significantattention during the year, particularly as a result of a Utahstatute asserting the precedence of state over federal law anda Connecticut lawsuit against the act. Meanwhile, state governmentscontinued to address a number of policy problems that federalofficials were unable or unwilling to confront, especially regardingenvironmental, health-care, and labor issues. Finally, althoughthe Supreme Court in 2005 continued its recent (2003–2004)trend of pulling back somewhat from its late-1990s Congress-curbingdecisions, federalism issues figured quite prominently in thesenate confirmation hearings for Chief Justice John Robertsand Justice Samuel Alito.     

Biennial Budgeting by the U.S. Congress

The president's budget is a political document, a prediction and an institution. As a political document, its version of the past and vision of the future are open to criticism. As a prediction, its projections arguable in the light of experience and professional judgment. As an institution, its contribution to the general capacity of government is subject to debate.     

The U.S. Senate and Federalism Policy in the 96th and 97th Congresses

Although the Congress of the United States has a major influenceon American federalism, there has been little systematic attentiongiven to what factors influence congressional voting on federalismissues. This article is an initial effort to address this question.Drawing on previous literature which has attempted to explainvoting decisions of congressmen, senators' "federalism" votingin the 96th and 97th Congresses is considered. The analysisindicates that ideology and party, especially the former, arethe major influences on senators' votes. Moreover, the variablesfound to be most important to senators' federalism votes appearsomewhat distinct from those that influence other domestic policies.Some suggestions for further research are also offered.     

The U.S. Congress Responds to Online Communication Needs

Abstract

The U.S. Congress, after a relatively slow start in the 1990s, is now making some progress in meeting the demands of online communications. Fueled by the growing use of e-mail by constituents and the development of online grassroots efforts, Congress has been inundated with e-mail. By using filtering systems, better software and hardware, and, most of all, better management techniques, many offices are now equipped to handle the great increase in electronic mail. While several steps behind the private sector, through fits and starts, Congress is attempting to catch up and meet the rising demand and volume of electronic communication. In some offices, there has been considerable progress in developing effective, interactive Web sites. These exceptional Web sites should serve as models of dynamic online communications, but for most congressional Web sites, there is a long way to go. Much depends on the attitudes and priorities set by lawmakers and their senior Staff.     

The U.S. Supreme Court's Federalism Jurisprudence: Alden v. Maine and the Enhancement of State Sovereignty

In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court's federalism jurisprudencehas shielded states from certain aspects of Congress's policymakingand enforcement authority. Through its interpretations of theinterstate commerce clause and of the Tenth and Eleventh Amendments,the Court has reminded Congress that its power to govern haslimits. This article presents the major federalism cases ofthe 1990s, focusing on Alden v. Maine, the most important federalismdecision of the 1998–1999 term. It concludes that theCourt's interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment and the sovereign-immunitydoctrine, which has constrained the federal government's powerto authorize private suits against states for violations offederal law, poses a threat to a fundamental principle of therule of law: "where there is a right, there is a remedy."     

State Merit Amicus Participation and Federalism Outcomes in the U.S. Supreme Court

Research suggests that merit amicus curiae participation correlateswith Supreme Court decision making and that states make frequentand effective use of this tool. To date, however, no study hasadequately examined the relationship between state amicus participationand the federalism values reflected in the Court's decisions.This article dev"Lelops and finds evidence for the assertionthat, when they cooperate in the amicus process, state participationis associated with an increase in the likelihood of rulingsfavoring state rather than national government power.     

Federalism in the 101st Congress

This article identifies important congressional roll-call votes,calculates a federalism score similar to that reported previouslyin Publius, and through factor analysis, examines the underlyingdimensions offederalism voting. The resulting federalism indicatorsare analyzed to determine their relationship to partisan andideological variables. Finally, the federalism orientation ofthe 101st Senate is compared with that of the 101st House ofRepresentatives as well as that of the 97th Senate.     

Wealth-Transfer Taxes in U.S. Fiscal Federalism: A Levy Still in Need of Reform

Wealth-transfer taxes are federal and state levies on the valueof estates, inheritances, and gifts. Because the federal governmentallows a limited tax credit, repeal of the federal tax has implicationsfor state governments. This article discusses the economic justificationof taxing wealth transfers and provides data on the importanceof the tax from 1977 to 1997. We measure the degree of variationin the use of the tax among the states and pinpoint those statesfor which death taxation is most important. Wealth-transfertaxation needs reform but, repeal of the federal tax is inappropriate.Instead, the state levies should be abandoned. We conclude byproposing to repeal the state taxes and reduce the federal taxby an amount equivalent to the value of the federal tax-credit.The resulting revenues, however, would not to be garnered bythe federal government but returned as revenue-sharing fundsto the resident state of the decedent.     

Issues and Institutions: "Winnowing" in the U.S. Congress

“Winnowing” is the pre‐floor process by which Congress determines the small percentage of bills that will receive committee attention. The vast majority of proposals languish in this vital agenda‐setting stage, yet our understanding of winnowing is nascent. Why do some bills move forward while most fail? I examine that question here by developing and testing a theoretical framework of winnowing grounded in bounded rationality, which includes institutional and sponsor cues and also incorporates the unique issue milieu. A heteroskedastic probit model is utilized to analyze the winnowing fate of all bills introduced across five issue areas in the House and Senate from 1991 to 1998. The findings counter much received wisdom and suggest that the process is indeed cue based. The majority party helps structure this critical process in both chambers, though party effects appear stronger in the House. Contrary to recent work on the rise of Senate individualism, the seniority of the sponsor has significant effects in both the Senate and House, but again exhibits a stronger effect in the House. Surprisingly, presidential proposals are no more likely to survive than typical bills. The findings further suggest that the entrepreneurial efforts of bill sponsors breathe life into this process.     

Towards an Integrated Model of the U.S. Supreme Court's Federalism Decision Making

Disputes involving the boundaries of state versus federal powermake up a substantial portion of the U.S. Supreme Court's docketand have undergone extensive analysis. Yet, the conventionalwisdom regarding the justices’ choices in these casesis that they are highly inconsistent. I argue that this is primarilya function of the failure of scholars to develop a comprehensivemodel of the justices’ federalism decision making. Toremedy this, I introduce an integrated model of the individualjustices’ choices in these cases, which is then subjectedto empirical testing in the Rehnquist Court era (1986–2004).I explore a host of determinants of the justices’ decisionmaking, including attitudinal, institutional, legal, and personalattributes, as well as the role of organized interests in theCourt. The findings reveal that the choices justices make inthese cases are not as discordant as most commentators suggest.Rather, they are relatively predictable through the applicationof an integrated model of judicial choice.