Putting Federalism in Its Place

Abstract

supported the project that led to this and the earlier volume, Federalism and Social Policy. Theresa Ramirez and Connie Rockman supported that project with the generosity and competence they always show. Comments from Alan Trench, Janet Laible, and Margitta Mätzke on the initial development of this project were very helpful. Finally, the University of Michigan Press, especially Elizabeth Demers, Kevin Rennells, and Haley Winkle, were the combination of supportive, engaged, tough, and patient that authors always appreciate. CHAPTER 1Why Should We Care about Federalism?In Texarkana there is an unusual building. As its name suggests, the town straddles the border between the U.S. states of Texas and Arkansas. The building stands along the border, half on each side. It is a U.S. federal government building, finished in 1933, that combines post offices and courts. The federal courts serving Texas are on the Texas side, and the federal courts serving Arkansas are on the Arkansas side. A post office, equally divided between the two states, serves both. The street splits to go around the building, with different pavement quality and parking rules on the two sides.That one building in a little-known railroad town is a metaphor for federalism. The states constitute the environment, but the federation constitutes the states. It is a legacy of specific political moments and policy decisions that there is a shared post office, serving the American people, in a unifying federal building that reinforces juridical divides between states in its very design. Perhaps it is telling that it is said (by the town's tourism bureau) to be the second most photographed federal building in the United States. It is of no significant architectural interest-except insofar as its location and its twinned courthouses inscribe federal politics in its stones. Letters mailed there since 1933 have been postmarked with a stamp that marks them as having been mailed in both states: "Texarkana-AR-TX" or "Texarkana, USA."The concrete complexity of a federal building in the American Cotton Belt belies much of what is written about federalism. Much research about the impact of federalism, or any other political or social institution, treats it as a binary variable, present or absent, and then look for its effects. Endless effort has been expended and endless ink spilled in scholarly and popular 1. More specifically, this book focuses primarily on federal countries located in Australasia, North America, and Western Europe, which does not mean the lessons it draws are not applicable to federal countries located outside the Global North, such as Argentina,

Balancing fiscal expenditure competition and long-term innovation investment: Exploring trade-offs and policy implications for local governments

“…The study indicates that a certain level of coordination among local governments is necessary to overcome the disincentives arising from uncoordinated competition [184]. Therefore, these results align with recent arguments advocating for "cooperative federalism" approaches, which advocate for a combination of localized flexibility and targeted national coordination [173].…”

“…While the objective of decentralization is to encourage competitive local governance, uncoordinated competition appears to yield adverse consequences. These findings align with arguments that highlight the importance of cooperative policy frameworks to tackle these issues [137,173,174]. Specifically, recent literature on approaches such as "cooperative federalism," which seek to strike a balance between local flexibility and selective national coordination mechanisms, present promising avenues for addressing these challenges [175,176].…”

COVID-19 and Nursing Homes in Decentralized Spain: How Governance and Public Policies Influence Working Conditions and Organizational Responses to the Crisis

“…4. The benefits of decentralization and federalism have to do with: a) more significant involvement of citizens in the processes of policy-making and governmental oversight; b) the adoption of faster, more flexible and place-specific solutions; c) the articulation of spaces for territorial experimentation and social innovation; d) financial sustainability based on the ability of local governments to contain the public spending of the national welfare state (see Andreotti et al, 2012;Kazepov et al, 2022;Greer et al, 2023;Obinger et al, 2005). 5.…”

Policy feedback, varieties of federalism, and the politics of health‐care funding in the United States, Mexico, and Canada

“…While the United States, Mexico, and Canada are all federal countries, federalism is best understood not as a binary variable, but as a bundle of legal and policy institutions that vary from country to country and operate as part of a configuration of variables (Greer et al., 2023). As Kincaid and Cole (2011, p. 54) note, “Mexico has been the most centralized of the three federations, whereas Canada has been the least, even though its constitution is more centralist than the U.S. Constitution.” The United States lies somewhere in the middle of the two countries in terms of fiscal and political decentralization (Requejo, 2010; Watts, 1999).…”