Continuidades e descontinuidades da Federação Brasileira: de como 1988 facilitou 1995

Imitação Ou Coerção? Constituições Estaduais E Centralização Federativa No Brasil

“…The significant centralism of the Brazilian constitutional model precedes, both politically and legally, an analogous tendency in other spheres -unsurprisingly as they are regulated by constitutional norms, as noted by Arretche (2009), who identifies, as early as in the original text of the 1988 Constitution, the normative conditions that would dictate the centralization begun in the 1990s: centrally established social policies; fiscal and tax norms laid down by the Union establishing state and municipal obligations; restrictions (even if, for years, inefficient) on tax competition between states ("fiscal war"); and lack of subnational unit autonomous legislative competence on various matters. 14 That is why, in contrast with the position held by Cavalcante (2011), to whom mimicry and normative isomorphism best describe the cases of decentralization in Latin America, we consider that, in the Brazilian case, coercive isomorphism provides the best explanation for the process: the hierarchically superior entity (the Union) restrictively determined the content of the subnational entities' constitutions.…”

“…This is not so much in terms of long-range legislative innovations, but mostly in terms of the drafting and implementation by the state of policies whose broad guidelines are established centrally (Arretche, 2009(Arretche, , 2012(Arretche, , 2013Lotta, Gonçalves and Bitelman, 2014). This autonomy is made evident in the various outcomes yielded by state-implemented policies in fields such as healthcare and education, regardless of the effects of state development inequalities and wealth.…”

“…As in this article we deal specifically with centralization as the ability to produce legal (among which are constitutional) norms, constitutional mimicry is construed as a centralization indicator thereof, ratifying the centralism of the Brazilian federation as already observed by other scholars in other fields (Almeida, 2005;Arretche, 2009Arretche, , 2012Arretche, , 2013Machado, 2014). Celina Souza (2005:111) notes that:…”

“…On one hand, states (and even municipalities) replicate, at the regional and local levels, constitutionally-mandated federal institutional forms (government branches, public administration, and law), reproducing at a smaller scale the very same characteristics of the federal government -what Couto and Arantes (2008) define as polity. On the other, both in the constitutional and subconstitutional frameworks, states and municipalities replicate policy, regionally and locally introducing public policies formulated and legislated at the federal level (Arretche, 2009), and implemented by subnational entities -albeit with some variation (Lotta, Gonçalves and Bitelman, 2014;Soares and Cunha, 2016). We may thus speak both of policy diffusion, in the sense ascribed by the literature on policy diffusion to the idea, and polity diffusion, in the sense proposed by Couto and Arantes.…”

Federal funding of health policy in Brazil: trends and challenges

“…First, the Brazilian Federal system is historically marked by the importance of the National Executive Branch, which persisted even in the post-1988-Constitutional context of decentralization of public policies 16,17 . Second, there are huge economic, social, and health-related heterogeneities in Brazil, heavily expressed in health.…”