American Federalism – A Gold Standard Of Effective Governance
American Federalism was a landmark achievement in the realm of how a country could be run in the 1700’s. At the time of its founding, America was like no other country in terms of allowing individual states to assert their own power and enact their own policies individual of other states and the national government. Of course, the country has run into roadblocks involving abuse of the system but, the various issues have always been solved. Federalism as is in the United States is the best way to govern as it allows for more people to have a direct say in how their lives will operate on a daily basis.
The United States is a very diverse country especially in terms of how differently many Americans think the country should operate. Many in Massachusetts are for a government that plays a more active role in their lives. While many in Alabama for example want the government to be an afterthought in their lives. As it is now, Massachusetts could enact their own policies that seriously ratchet up environmental standards or increase school funding. And Alabama could severely cut funding to allow for more economic growth within the state. Detractors of this style of government speak on how this creates a country being inherently inequal. However, if the citizens of an individual state think they need to be more or less like another state they have the power to change how their state works by going to the polls and voting for candidates who share a similar ideology. With the power in the people’s hands on a more localized level, they can have more influence on their own lives.
Arguably the most controversial issue in the United States today is the refugee crisis. On a national level President Donald Trump has attempted to ban many refugees from entering the country, as well as, getting rid of “sanctuary cities. ” Largely, it has been the states who have tried to block these bans from coming into effect on the United States. While some states are against the refugee ban, other states are free to go ahead and put in place their own ban on refugees if the state government believes it is what their people want and is in their best interests. Similarly, if a state feels that turning over illegal immigrants to federal agencies is not the best for them they can largely avoid the issue by simply not doing it. The United Sates is too large as a country for anyone federal agency to be able to operate on such a small scale. If a state were to feel that illegal immigrants were causing lots of harm, then they could simply turn them over to those federal agencies and deal with them that way.
While the United Sates is unified under one flag, it is so large that the ideas of how life should run vary greatly from coast to coast and border to border. When it comes to issues like healthcare many will say that it needs to be standardized across the country. That could not be further from the truth. When individual states are given the job of tailoring a healthcare plan it works out much better than when the national government tries to create a standardized healthcare plan. The affordable care act is largely derived from Massachusetts’ health care plan enacted under Mitt Romney. While it worked very well in Massachusetts, on a national level the affordable care act has been met with consistent and many times valid criticism. For example, the affordable care act has effectively killed several insurance companies and due to the lack of competition increased premiums as a result.
The money used for the affordable care act could instead be given to the state so that they could create a system that works better for their own citizens. Surely, life and health are vastly different in a state like Connecticut as compared to Arizona. In fact, the median income in Connecticut is roughly $20, 000 higher than the median income in Arizona. If each individual state was able to create their own health care plan, then they could allow for better care to be taken of each individual citizen. Many Americans fear that a lack of unified national policies will lead to a cracked an ununified country. They can even point to the nullification crisis in South Carolina in 1832. South Carolina had attempted to nullify the federal governments tariffs as they felt they were being put at a greater disadvantage than other states in the union.
While these fears are not unfounded, they can easily be disproven. During the nineteenth century the country was still in its infancy. Not even fifty years had passed since the Constitution was ratified. The Constitution was still in a state of flux as many of the most crucial amendments passed after the Bill of Rights had yet to be conceived. In the present day, the United States has much greater diversity. The citizens of every state are more diverse than in the nineteenth century which inherently leads to a much greater variety of how they people of any individual state want to live. With more ideas on how to live in each state it is much more difficult for any one state to “break away” from the union. With each state able to have influence on how their own citizens live it creates a sense of unity within the country because every citizen will have a greater say in how they live.
American federalism should be considered the gold standard for how effective it can be when used correctly. In a country as large in both population and landmass wise, the normal way to live is surely different across the nation. With each state able to create policies for themselves it creates a system where every citizen is able to feel more included and valued. Liberals in California do not need to worry if the national congress is controlled by the Republicans, and conservatives in Texas need not worry if Vermont passes legislation on the legalization of marijuana. Every citizen’s vote matters more when placed on a smaller scale. This greater level of power allows everyone to feel more valued and wanted.
