Downloaded 23 times
More Related Content
Similar to Understanding public policy chapter 5 (dye)
![AP Government Practice Exam [5]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/apgovpractexam5-140425142015-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Understanding public policy chapter 5 (dye)
- 1. Understanding Public Policy Fifteenthedition Chapter 5 Federalism and State Policies Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 2. Modules (1 of2) • 5.1: American Federalism • 5.2: Why Federalism? • 5.3: Politics and Institutional Arrangements • 5.4: American Federalism: Variations on the Theme • 5.5: Federalism Revived? • 5.6: Federalism and Obamacare • 5.7: Money and Power Flow to Washington Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 3. Modules (2 of2) • 5.8: Federal Preemptions and Mandates • 5.9: States Battle Back: Legalizing Pot • 5.10: States Confront Public Employee Union Power • 5.11: State Policymaking by Initiative and Referenda • 5.12: Comparing Public Policies of the States • Summary: Federalism and State Policies Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 4. Learning Objectives (1of 2) • 5.1: Review the federal fabric of the United States • 5.2: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.3: Analyze the federalist and the conservative views on the division of responsibilities and finances • 5.4: Recount the history of American federalism • 5.5: Interpret meaning of devolution with respect to sharing of responsibilities between the centre and the state • 5.6: Analyze that way Obamacare challenged traditional American federalism ideas Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 5. Learning Objectives (2of 2) • 5.7: Outline the way the federal grant money is utilized • 5.8: Contrast between preemption and total preemption with respect to the precedence of the federal or state powers • 5.9: Examine why the issue of legalizing pot is a tussle between federal and state laws • 5.10: Recall challenges to the union power • 5.11: Review the arguments in favor of initiative and referenda for state constitutional amendments • 5.12: Illustrate differences in public policies of the states Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 6. 5.1: American Federalism Objective:Review the federal fabric of the United States – National and subnational governments – Governments in the United States Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 7. 5.2: Why Federalism?(1 of 4) Objective: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.2.1: Protection Against Tyranny – Republican principles – Auxiliary Precautions • 5.2.2: Policy Diversity – Federalism – States and local governments Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 8. 5.2: Why Federalism?(2 of 4) Objective: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.2.3: Conflict Management – Policies – Decision making • 5.2.4: Dispersal of Power – Power distribution – Pluralism Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 9. 5.2: Why Federalism?(3 of 4) Objective: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.2.5: Increased Participation – Political participation – Local leaders • 5.2.6: Improved Efficiency – Governing from Washington – Government activities from Washington Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 10. 5.2: Why Federalism?(4 of 4) Objective: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.2.7: Ensuring Policy Responsiveness – Multiple governments – Policy preferences • 5.2.8: Encouraging Policy Innovation – Federalism – Progressivism Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 11. 5.3: Politics andInstitutional Arrangements (1 of 2) Objective: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.3.1: Ensuring Policy Responsiveness – Policy levels – Centralizing policy • 5.3.2: Concentrating Benefits to Organized Interests – Policy preferences – Rent seeking Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 12. 5.3: Politics andInstitutional Arrangements (2 of 2) Objective: Argue in favor of federalism • 5.3.3: Dispersing Costs to Unorganized Taxpayers – Cost dispersal – Taxpayers Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 13. 5.4: American Federalism:Variations on the Theme (1 of 4) Objective: Recount the history of American federalism • 5.4.1: State-Centered Federalism (1787–1865) – State units – Supremacy of national government • 5.4.2: Dual Federalism (1865–1913) – Dual federalism – National government – State government – Layer cake Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 14. 5.4: American Federalism:Variations on the Theme (2 of 4) Objective: Recount the history of American federalism • 5.4.3: Cooperative Federalism (1913–1964) – Cooperative federalism – National government on shared goals • 5.4.4: Centralized Federalism (1964–1980) – Centralized government – States' role Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 15. 5.4: American Federalism:Variations on the Theme (3 of 4) Objective: Recount the history of American federalism • 5.4.5: New Federalism (1980–1985) – New federalism by President Richard M. Nixon – New federalism by President Ronald Reagan • 5.4.6: Coercive Federalism (1985–1995) – Challenges faced by congress before 1985 – Garcia decision Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 16. 5.4: American Federalism:Variations on the Theme (4 of 4) Objective: Recount the history of American federalism • 5.4.7: Representational Federalism – Representational federalism – Supreme Court Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 17. 5.5: Federalism Revived? Objective:Interpret meaning of devolution with respect to sharing of responsibilities between the centre and the state • 5.5.1: Welfare Reform and “Devolution” – Welfare reform and devolution – AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) • 5.5.2: Supreme Court Revival of Federalism (1995–?) – Supreme Court decision (1995) – Supreme Court decision from 1997 Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 18. 5.6: Federalism andObamacare Objective: Analyze that way Obamacare challenged traditional American federalism ideas – The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – Supreme Court case, 2012 (Chief Justice John Roberts) Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 19. 5.7: Money andPower Flow to Washington Objective: Outline the way the federal grant money is utilized • 5.7.1: Grants-in-Aid – Grants-in-Aid – Reagan administration • 5.7.2: Federal Grant Purposes – Health and welfare – Others Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 20. Figure 5.1: Purposesof Federal Grant-in-Aid Money Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 21. 5.8: Federal Preemptionsand Mandates Objective: Contrast between preemption and total preemption with respect to the precedence of the federal or state powers • 5.8.1: Federal Mandates – Preemption – Examples of federal mandates • 5.8.2: "Unfunded" Mandates – Unfunded mandates – Challenges Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 22. 5.9: States BattleBack: Legalizing Pot Objective: Examine why the issue of legalizing pot is a tussle between federal and state laws – Conflicts between federal and state laws – Marijuana laws in states Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 23. 5.10: States ConfrontPublic Employee Union Power Objective: Recall challenges to the union power – Proposed reforms by Republican Governor Scott Walker – Public employee unions Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 24. Figure 5.2: MarijuanaLaws in the States Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 25. 5.11: State Policymakingby Initiative and Referenda (1 of 2) Objective: Review the arguments in favor of initiative and referenda for state constitutional amendments • 5.11.1: Initiative – Definition of initiative – Advantages • 5.11.2: Referendum – Proponents of direct democracy – Opponents of direct democracy Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 26. 5.11: State Policymakingby Initiative and Referenda (2 of 2) Objective: Review the arguments in favor of initiative and referenda for state constitutional amendments • 5.11.3: Politics of State Initiatives and Referenda – Marijuana, 2012 – Labor union elections, 2010–2012 – Income tax, 2010 – Same-sex marriage, 2012 – Obamacare, 2012 Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 27. 5.12: Comparing PublicPolicies of the States Objective: Illustrate differences in public policies of the states • 5.12.1: Variations in State Tax Policy – Sales tax – Income tax • 5.12.2: Variations in State Educational Spending – States spending more on education – Others Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
- 28. Summary: Federalism andState Policies • Separate governments • Proponents of federalism • Opponents of federalism • Coercive federalism and representational federalism Copyright © 2017, 2013, 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Editor's Notes
- #7 Point 1- National and subnational governments Units of local governments such as states, provinces, regions, cities, counties, towns, villages Exercise separate and autonomous authorities Elect own officials Tax own citizens Point 2- Governments in the United States More than 90,000 separate governments Includes states, counties, municipalities, and special districts Local governments are subdivisions of states States may create, alter, or abolish local governments
- #8 5.2.1: Protection Against Tyranny Point 1- Republican principles Insufficient to protect individuals and minorities Responsive to popular concerns Point 2- Auxiliary Precautions Federalism Notion of "opposite and rival interests" 5.2.2: Policy Diversity Point 1- Federalism Permits policy diversity No uniform policy Point 2- States and local governments Deals better with specific problems Example: Washington bureaucrats might not solve issues in Commerce, Texas
- #9 5.2.3: Conflict Management Point 1- Policies Federalism helps manage policy conflicts States to pursue own policies Point 2- Decision making Citizens permitted to make decisions at state and local levels Helps avoid battling over single national policies 5.2.4: Dispersal of Power Point 1- Power distribution Added protection against tyranny Political base for opposition party Point 2- Pluralism Widespread in the United States Contributed to state and local government success
- #10 5.2.5: Increased Participation Point 1- Political participation Increase in political offices Separate offices in counties, townships, and districts Point 2- Local leaders Closer to public More responsive 5.2.6: Improved Efficiency Point 1- Governing from Washington Results in inefficient governance Leads to bureaucracy and red tape Point 2- Government activities from Washington Delay and confusions Uncontrollable activities such as garbage collection, sewage disposal, and roads
- #11 5.2.7: Ensuring Policy Responsiveness Point 1- Multiple governments More sensitive to citizens' views Different package of benefits Point 2- Policy preferences Help people and businesses to relocate Encourage competition amongst states to offer improved services at lower cost 5.2.8: Encouraging Policy Innovation Point 1- Federalism Encourages policy experimentation and innovation Instrument of progressivism Point 2- Progressivism Groundwork for New Deal Federal programs such as income tax and social security had antecedents at state level Current liberal policy agendas
- #12 5.3.1: Ensuring Policy Responsiveness Point 1- Policy levels Decide the level of government in enacting policies Intergovernmental policies Point 2- Centralizing policy Policies preferences of national elites extended to state and local Goal and priorities should prevail throughout nation 5.3.2: Concentrating Benefits to Organized Interests Point 1- Policy preferences Biased to nation's strongest and best-organized states Rent seeking costs are smaller in strong nations Point 2- Rent seeking Special subsidies, privileges, protections by government Disadvantageous for a single national capital
- #13 5.3.3: Dispersing Costs to Unorganized Taxpayers Point 1- Cost dispersal Key to interest group success Better accommodates strategies of special interest groups Point 2- Taxpayers State and local governments increase the burden of individual taxpayers Leads to concentrated benefits
- #14 5.4.1: State-Centered Federalism (1787–1865) Point 1- State units Most important units in American federal system Resolution of policy questions Provision of public services Slavery issues Point 2- Supremacy of national government Frequently questioned by Antifederalists Also by defenders of slavery and secession 5.4.2: Dual Federalism (1865–1913) Point 1- Dual federalism Government functions divided between state and nation States decided most policy issues Point 2- National government Concentrated its attention on delegated powers Examples: National defense, foreign affairs, tariffs, and post offices Point 3- State government Dealt with domestic policy issues Examples: Education, welfare, health, crime justice Point 4- Layer cake Separation of policy responsibilities Base as local government State as middle level National at the top
- #15 5.4.3: Cooperative Federalism (1913–1964) Point 1- Cooperative federalism Nation and state together exercise responsibilities Marble cake Point 2- National government on shared goals Emphasized cooperation to achieve common national and state goals Relied on tax to provide financial assistance 5.4.4: Centralized Federalism (1964–1980) Point 1- Centralized government Problems such as solid waste disposal and pollution, declared as national problems Reserved powers of states no longer concern of Supreme Court Point 2- States' role Responding to policy initiatives and regulations Implement federal policies in welfare, housing, and environmental protection
- #16 5.4.5: New Federalism (1980–1985) Point 1- New federalism by President Richard M. Nixon General revenue sharing Sharing tax revenues with state and local governments Point 2- New federalism by President Ronald Reagan Reduced federal involvement in domestic programs Encouraged policy responsibility 5.4.6: Coercive Federalism (1985–1995) Point 1- Challenges faced by Congress before 1985 Performing traditional functions No direct orders to states Point 2- Garcia decision Removed all barriers on Congress Directly legislate state and local government concerns Representational federalism
- #17 5.4.7: Representational Federalism Point 1- Representational federalism No constitutional division of powers between state and nation Role of state in electing members of congress and the president Point 2- Supreme Court Endorsed a federal system in Garcia decision Justice Lewis Powell argued for federalism to be retained
- #18 5.5.1: Welfare Reform and “Devolution” Point 1- Welfare reform and devolution Key to devolution Devolution: Responsibilities passed on from national to state governments Point 2- AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) Reformed AFDC welfare bill with amended eligibilities Two-year limit on cash benefits Five-year lifetime limit added 5.5.2: Supreme Court Revival of Federalism (1995–?) Point 1- Supreme Court decision (1995) Limit on Congress's power over interstate commerce Gun-Free School Zones Act Powers delegated by Constitution and states Point 2- Supreme Court decision from 1997 The Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act Interstate commerce clause Congress's Violence Against Women Act (2000)
- #19 Point 1- The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Mandatory health care insurance for Americans Penalty for noncompliance Point 2- Supreme Court case, 2012 (Chief Justice-John Roberts) Individual mandate interpreted as tax Suggested voluntary acceptance of the program by states
- #20 5.7.1: Grants-in-Aid Point 1- Welfare reform and devolution 1957: National defense highway program (1965–1968): President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society programs 1980: All revenue came from the federal government Point 2- AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) Ended general revenue sharing Succeeded in consolidating many categorical grant programs Control on revenue allocation Block grants 5.7.2: Federal Grant Purposes Point 1- Health and welfare Accounts for two-thirds of federal aid money Includes Medicaid for poor Family cash aid and food stamps Point 2- Others Preservation of historic buildings Aid to foreign refugees, riot control, school milk, and so forth
- #21 Medicaid is the largest category of federal grant money Followed by welfare, which includes cash aid and food stamps Next major part goes to education and transport
- #22 5.8.1: Federal Mandates Point 1- Preemption Total Partial Standard partial Point 2- Examples of federal mandates Age Discrimination Act, 1986 Asbestos Hazard Emergency Act, 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act, 1986 Americans with Disabilities Act, 1990 No Child Left Behind Act, 2001 5.8.2: "Unfunded" Mandates Point 1- Unfunded mandates Federal mandates impose heavy costs Unfunded mandates: no federal money to cover costs Point 2- Challenges State and local officials urge the imposition of unfunded mandates Private industries also suffer
- #23 Point 1- Conflicts between federal and state laws Federal government prohibited marijuana for any purpose States legalized marijuana for medical use Point 2- Marijuana laws in states Colorado and Washington legalized recreational use Alaska, Arizona, California, and other states legalized medical use
- #24 Point 1- Proposed reforms by Republican Governor Scott Walker More contributions to pension and health care benefits by state workers Limiting collective bargaining to wages Wisconsin budget repair bill Point 2- Public employee unions More secure job than private sector Percentage of private workforce in union decreased Unions for government employees increased Ranked among top political campaign contributors
- #25 Demonstrates the initiatives for constitutional amendments in the states Arizona and Arkansas stands first with 15 percent and 10 percent respectively Next in place are California, Colorado, Florida, and Illinois
- #26 5.11.1: Initiative Point 1- Definition of initiative Percentage of voters propose policy changes Constitutional amendments or state law Point 2- Advantages Bypass legislature Allow citizens to propose law and constitutional amendments 5.11.2: Referendum Point 1- Proponents of direct democracy Enhances government responsiveness and accountability Places concern on public agenda Secure constitutional amendments and laws ignored or rejected Point 2- Opponents of direct democracy Protection for individual liberty Rights of minorities Protect against tyranny
- #27 5.11.3: Politics of State Initiatives and Referenda Point 1- Marijuana, 2012 Colorado's constitutional amendment on legalizing and regulating growth and sale of marijuana Massachusetts's law on medical use of marijuana Montana's law on medical use of marijuana Oregon's law on personal use of marijuana (failed to pass) Washington's law on legalizing and regulating production, distribution, and possession of marijuana Point 2- Labor union elections, 2010–2012 Secret ballot for union election by voters in Alabama, Arizona, South Carolina, Utah To overcome "card check" Point 3- Income tax, 2010 Washington voters (35–66%) rejected a proposal Enact a state income tax on individual earning more than $200,00 Point 4- Same-sex marriage, 2012 Voters in Maine approved Voters in Maryland approved Voters in Minnesota rejected and banned Point 5- Obamacare, 2012 Prohibition of mandatory health care coverage Florida rejected proposal
- #28 5.12.1: Variations in State Tax Policy Point 1- Sales tax States rely on sales tax for funds Sales tax 5–9% Groceries, rent, and medicines usually exempted Point 2- Income tax States rely on income tax for funds States tax individual income Some states have margin exceeding 10% Others adopt flat income taxes 5.12.2: Variations in State Educational Spending Point 1- States spending more on education New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut stand in first place Followed by Massachusetts and Maryland Point 2- Others Spend less on education Utah, Idaho, Arizona, Oklahoma