Texas Federalism Part C
Articles,  Blog

Texas Federalism Part C


loans and yet states in this example
Maryland that imposed a tax on this National Bank federal government said
we’re not paying a tax in the state he wondered a year Supreme Court and the
Supreme Court agreed with a national government states can not tax the
federal government again English the power of the federal government given
versus Ogden you and New York place restrictions on ships in other words
using the Hudson River as well as other networks within a state your Supreme
Court and heard this case the National government as well as New Jersey had a
problem with this the US Supreme Court heard the case and told the state of New
York it is not up to you to regulate commerce it is a federal issue again it
weakened the states gave more power to the national government by the 1830s but
even earlier by the 1830s states started promoting states rights and in some
cases a Supreme Court support now states in the south and those who supported
states rights promoted two concepts one was nullification the other was secession
nullification is the legal theory that a US state has the right to nullify any
federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional secession that withdraw
a state from the Union will expand on those in a few minutes Dred Scott vs.
Sanford another court case 1857 this case right here weakened the
federal government in this case the Supreme Court made two distinct
decisions that we can discuss number one mrs. Scott was not a year citizen
therefore not entitled to sue in federal court again a very shameful decision by
the US Supreme Court but also he made another decision he said that Congress
had no power to abolish slavery in the territories and slaves were private
property protected by the Constitution this part of the case weakened the
national government he gave more power to the states so we see different cases
and there’s many others that helped shape the relationship between the
states and our federal government within our federal system of government Dred
Scott case galvanized the north brought Abraham Lincoln the Republican Party to
power and for the first time in our history the President and a majority of
both chambers of Congress opposed slavery these issues brought into existence in
other words a conflict within our society within our country and we’ll
talk about the Civil War now these states have the power of
nullification the answer is no States cannot declared laws of the national
government is unconstitutional only the US Supreme Court can do so ten states
secede from the union again the answer is no states do not have the power to
see from the Union Texas versus white 1869 reaffirmed this decision once
Indian Union you’re a permanent member of this union you cannot leave now we understand that the Year Supreme
Court is the final umpire when he within our federal system of government when it
comes to any disagreements between the states and the national as well as
between the different branches on the national level it is a year Supreme
Court that has the final say so if the US Court had not taken this role the
federal system and maybe even the United States could not have survived its early
years now Oliver Wendell Holmes who served the Supreme Court from 1902 to
1932 made the following statement I do not think the United States will come to
an end if we the US Supreme Court in other words loss our power to declare an
act of Congress void I do think the union would be imperil if he could not
make that declaration as to the laws of the several states and what he was
saying was is that our country if the US Supreme Court did not have the power of
judicial review over the national government the federal government our
government would still continue however if the US Supreme Court did not have the
power of judicial review over the state governments at least Justice Holmes
argument was that our government would not have been able to survive in other
words stages of federalism state senator federalism 1787 with the US Constitution
until the post Civil War time period dual federalism post-civil time period
until the 1930s and then stage three what we call cooperative federalism in
existence today now stage one States under federalism from the adoption of
the Constitution at the end of the Civil War the states perceive themselves to be
the most important units of the American federal system state supported
nullification states supported secession we know an altercation is we know what
secession is we discussed this already with a civil war it answer the questions
can state secede the answer is no can States nullify acts of Congress the
answer is no we saw the end of this principle that existed during that time
for at least in the eyes of some state governments that became known as States
entered federalism and from the Civil War up until the 1930s we saw the
creation of what became known as dual federalism system of government in which
both the states and the national government remained supreme within their
own spheres each responsible for some policies though fell ISM is often called
layer-cake federalism dole fellows an existing on the end of the Civil War to
the 1930s and basically in other words the federal government had jurisdiction
jurisdiction gives me over some areas and states had jurisdiction over others
and as long as each level of government did not cross over to the other did not
interfere with the other and then things would run smoothly each double
government within its sphere of influence made policy implemented their
policy and tax to pay for its implementation similar to draw me down a
two-lane highway as long as each car the opposing as you’re drawing me down
opposing traffic stays in their lane everything gets done no accidents and we
continue the next day the federal government had certain responsibilities
under dual federalism international trade national defense and so on but
States had their own responsibilities areas of control within the states
voting elections education social policies all under the control of state
governments for the 1930s basically the Great
Depression ended dual federalism for the 1930s on we are part of what we call
cooperative federalism it’s a system of government which powers and policy
summers are shared between states and the national government shared costs
shared administration and states will follow federal guidelines again due to
the Great Depression and other factors states turn to the federal government
for help so the federal government provided money for the various programs
carried out by the states so there’s a shared cost where the federal government
pays for some of the expenses of these programs and the state government does
and we saw the growth of this cooperation between the two levels but
when an institution such as the federal government is giving money to the states
it also acquires a level of control within those programs cooperative
federalism from the nineteen thirties on both federal and state governments have
worked together on many policy areas working in harmony to achieve mutually
beneficial outcomes sort of a son this clear two lane highway that existed
before under dole federalism in reality doesn’t exist because there’s a blending
and that’s where the it’s also known as marble cake fell ISM a blending between
when it comes to cost administration control between the federal government
and States I get for the most part it’s worked wonderfully however we’ve also
seen in many areas disagreement clashes within the national or federal
government and state governments as an example immigration policy civil rights
issues if we take a look average share of non-military spending
by the federal state and local governments before under new federalism
and after under cooperative federalism before the federal government paid about
17% of the total of various programs out there after the Great Depression 1939
the federal government now was paying up a 47% when he comes to spending
approximately 47% of the total huge increase giving money to the states and
local governments and if we take a look from 17 in 1929 47 in 1939 66 in 2007
two out of every three dollars money spent by the national government it’s
become much more deeply involved in the various programs that exist at our state
level now we take a look 2013 federal grants to state and local
governments grew rapidly we’re now over six hundred billion dollars per year
money given by the federal government to various state and local government
programs if you take a look 43% of the total money goes towards Medicaid and
other such programs in other words to the states
cooperative federalism for the 1930s on both federal and state governments that
work together on many policy areas a blending of responsibility Authority as
well as cost also known as marble cake federalism on a dual federalism or Larry
cake we knew exactly what the state controlled and the national or the
federal government in on interfere we knew exactly what the federal government
controlled and states didn’t interfere under cooperative federalism or marble
cake there’s a blending of the two it’s not clear lines of distinction fiscal
federalism the pattern of spending taxing and providing grants in a federal
system it is a cornerstone of our national governments relation to the
state and local governments today fiscal federalism is part of while for the
federalism if you take a look 2015 53% of all health care costs paid by States
money given to them by the federal government transportation of 13% of all
spending for transportation programs for the States money given to them by the
federal government so what does the federal government get they gain some
control you ever wonder why every state – the drinking age of 21 it’s a state
issue is that a coincidence no it is not a coincidence the national government
wanted States to increase their legal drinking age to 21 but the states
control this issue the national doesn’t have jurisdiction or doesn’t have
authority over the states on this but what does it say need he needs money
from the national so the federal government threatened basically states
that if they did not increase the legal drinking age to 21
the federal government would take away some of their federal highway funds and
states did increase it presume level intoxication the state issues not a
federal issue federal government wanted an increase when it comes to this
punishment so you had the states being pressured to reduced the level of
intoxication 2.08 the federal government will take away
some of the federal highway funds if this presumed level intoxication was not
reduced to point zero eight every state reduced it not because they were
required to do so but rather if they didn’t they will lose money speed limits
and so on these are all state issues but the national government our federal
government has used money to be able to get States to do what it wants them to
do how much hundreds of billions of dollars over six hundred billion dollars
per year now there’s different types of grants that the federal government gives
to the states and he gained some influence over the states we have
categorical grants these are federal grants that can be used for specific
purposes they have strings attached and author require matching funds about 90%
of federal aid are spent for categorical grants and there’s two types of
categorical grants project grants and formula grants project grants based on
merit formula grants amount varies based on a formula so categorical grant one
type of grant and there are two examples of categorical grants project and
formula did not confuse these principles so a project grant is a categorical
grant a formula grant is a categorical grant our project grant based on merit
think of tuition reimbursement is individuals where individuals have their
tuition paid for as long as they meet a certain criteria earn a certain GPA it’s
based on merit and formula grant based on a formula where the federal
government takes a look as an example population Pennsylvania has half the
population of Texas Tech there’s twice as many people living in Texas therefore
when the federal government distributes dollars to the states and assistance it
looks at population it’s gonna give Texas more money then he will
Pennsylvania because Texas has twice as many people so categorical grants one
type of federal grant and there are two types of categorical grants that we’ve
already discussed and then we have block grants these are
federal grants given more or less automatically to support local programs
but 90 percent of the grants are categorical grants we’ve discussed what
formula grants are not a thing there’s anything more to discuss if you have questions never hesitate to
send me an email or bring it to my attention in the class we’ve also
discussed project grants both of these are types of categorical grants we said more than six hundred billion
dollars a year giving back to our states a little governments by the federal
government and there’s a little something for everybody
almost every different program out there and that is warming by Universalism federal government calls of grants free
money States calling mandates because they’re forced to do something now the
federal government is used money as a way to control the states even though
you might be free money the national government or our federal government in
other words remember whether we call it the federal the national or the central
it’s the same thing under this free money that we call grants the federal
government tell States what they can again I’ll do I provide a definition for
mandates here require States to carry out certain policies conditions on aid
require States city governments to spend grant money certain ways if they wanted
to receive that federal funding and we also have underfunded mandates and
unfunded mandates underfunded Medicaid u.s. requires States to provide health
care to low-income however the u.s. pays a próximos 58 percent but approximately
57 percent of the cost of states pay approximately 43 percent of the cost
unfunded mandates federal law that imposes costs on state and local
governments as well as private industry without reimbursement from the federal
government all right as we mention about unfunded
mandates these are federal laws that impose costs on state and local
governments with and often private industry as well without reimbursement
from the federal government as we mentioned the Americans with
Disabilities Act is a very good example if we take a look at the state of Texas
where do we get our money now for the 2014 2015 biannual budget a two-year
budget the state of Texas brought in over two hundred and eight billion
dollars as we can see from this chart 37 percent of the money that the state of
Texas brought in was money from the federal government through federal
grants 46 percent was through taxes now these figures change based on the state
of the economy on the national level as well as on the state level if we take a
look at the 2016 2017 biannual budget 214 billion dollars was brought in federal grants went down a little bit
not only as a dollar amount but as a percentage of our revenues that were
brought in for the 2016 2017 budget thirty-four percent of the money that
Texas brought in came from the federal government through grants where did the
money go aromas of the 2016 2017 budget the
largest expenditure is for education thirty seven point four percent of the
total budget then Health and Human Services thirty-six point nine percent
of the total budget and not only does a state of Texas as a
state receive federal grants but our counties our cities and so on receive
money as well Fort Worth ISD latest statistics a
hundred and ninety million dollars in federal grants that’s 27 percent of the
total dollars of the Eisley spends in other words came from the federal
government Texas in 2009 due to the Great Recession the federal government
provided assistance to our states and local governments the state of Texas
received over twenty nine billion dollars from that stimulus package
Tarrant County received over 1 billion dollars 1.15 billion to be exactly the
city of Fort Worth received 47 million dollars from the stimulus package
different examples in other words of money coming in from the federal
government to our state and local governments if we take a look 2016 2017
34 percent of the money the revenues that Texas had access to was money
provided through the grant system money provided to the state from the federal
government number 11 only 10 states were more dependent on federal grants than we
were in other words and again if we take a look
Medicaid we discussed how the federal government helps us pay for Medicaid
this chart right here shows in other words the Medicaid expansion program as
of January 2015 and what percentage of individuals in
other words within a poverty level the state accepted into the Medicaid program
new federalism in the nineteen even in the 1970s but particularly the 1980s and
90s we saw less federal intervention within the states it dena me that we saw
a cut in federal grants what he meant was that the federal government
continued to give money but they allowed to stay in local governments they have
more discretion more of a say-so in reference to how this money’s going to
be spent and what programs so this trend of returning discretion to the states
began in the 1970s with Nixon and the Carter administration’s continued in the
1980s with Ronald Reagan George senior as well as in the 1990s in other words
under Bill Clinton’s administration it was known as new federalism it’s also
known as the Reagan Revolution as well as devolution again the federal
government continuing to give money to the states through the federal grant
system by giving more discretion along the states in other words they have a a
bigger say-so in reference to that money an example of new federalism not only
did Congress through the welfare reform act out of the 1990s but the Supreme
Court itself gave more power back to the states the United States versus Lopez
and United States versus Morrison both cases reversed the supreme court’s
interpretation in other words restricting its interpretation of what
constituted interstate commerce giving more authority back to the states
limiting the use of the federal government limiting its
use of the Commerce Clause do you have jurisdiction in areas within our states
again we mentioned the welfare reform act in 1996 where the federal government
again we continue to give money to our states but allowing the states to have a
greater impact greater say-so within these programs now consequences of the
federal system high degree of complexity in policymaking it allows diversity in the system
different ways of dealing with issues it allows experimentation at the state and
local level but it also has certain negative consequences many say that it
is a inequality as a result of the system since states have jurisdiction in
certain areas we see states some states investing more money per capita than
others investing more money per student in education than other states there if
we take a look here Pennsylvania thirteen thousand four hundred and sixty
seven dollars per pupil New Mexico 9070 California nine thousand hundred and
thirty nine Washington nine thousand four hundred eighty three New York
nineteen thousand and seventy six dollars per student Texas eight thousand
six hundred and seventy one because education is a state issue states
determine the funding in these programs they get money from the federal
government but also it states and local governments they determine the funding
and we can see due to federalism we have different spending levels per student
within our country we already mentioned the Supreme Court through its use of
judicial review started placing limitations on the national government
the federal government in the 1980’s the 1990s giving back power to the states one
example 1973 roe v wade a woman has a right to
privacy a right to choose but we saw as the years went by since roe v wade we
saw states placing certain restrictions the courts interpretation as long as the
state did not create an undue burden states were allowed to place waiting
periods parental consent issue of funding all areas of influence that went
back to the states in other words we talked about the Lopez case where the
Supreme Court told Congress that is jurisdiction under the Commerce Clause was unconstitutional in this area then
he had expanded its power in other words too much and declared in other words
Congress’s ability to limit an individual’s ability when it comes to
the second amendment as unconstitutional federalism as outlined in Philadelphia
in 1787 has evolved considerably like any relationship and we are in a
relationship between the federal and the states it is a relationship initially
the states were in quite powerful the federal government the national
government in other words was small weak over time the National gun became
progressively stronger we saw in the latter part of the 20th century power
going back to the states with new federalism and then 9/11 and the
subsequent war on terror helped refocus publication on the federal government
the national government and we saw a continuation of the growth that
historically we’ve had the growth of power in the hands of the federal
government we can take a look at this chart the Constitution replacing the
Articles of Confederation gave more power to the national government the
federal government case after case more and more power in the hands of the
federal government the Civil War the Civil War amendments war world one world
war two as well the Great Depression civil rights issues more and more power
in the hands of the federal government this relationship now between the
federal government and the states became more and more one-sided where the
federal government the national government of the words started
dominating this relationship being the stronger partner in this relationship
and then we saw with a Reagan Revolution the evolution new federalism power being
given back to the state governments and then the war on terror 9/11 the warrant
here we began again this growth in a power of the national government the
federal government thank you please watch this presentation there will be
quiz questions and exam questions on this presentation thank you
you

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *