Author

Tutor

Course

Date

Federalism

Introduction

The relationship between the United States federal government and the state governments has always attracted a lot of attention. This is defined as federalism, a relationship that means a shift or change of power or authority from the state governments to the national government. Federalism, as a theory, underlines the federal principles that divide powers between the common institutions and member units. Unlike in the case of unitary states, there is non-centralization of sovereignty of federal political order between the varied levels, in which case the units in all levels have the final authority on the varied areas. While there are a number of events that may be tantamount to federalism, the “Race to the Top” program is arguably the most explicit example of federalism in the United States. This refers to a $4.35 billion grant program that was established as a stimulus package. In this program, the states were supposed to submit a proposal on how to improve their educational systems to the federal government. If the proposals were approved, the federal government would provide the funds with which they would implement their plans (Metzger, 19).

There are various aspects that make the program a representation of federalism. First, it is worth noting that the program had a clear outline as to the powers of the states and those of the federal governments. The states have a significant discretion over how the funds would be spent. In fact, the state can spend 50% of the funds won as it deems fit, guided by rules so loose that the state would still comply by using the money on almost any program. In these programs, the states would set the policies governing the learning standards even in cases where uniformity was crucial. The states received a maximum of forty points for joining a conglomerate of states that establish and adopt uniform K-12 standards (Metzger, 19). It is worth noting that the federal government was not involved in the writing of the standards, or even establishing the body that wrote the standards.

The federal government, on its part, has relative autonomy as to how much money would be awarded to which state. In essence, “Race to the Top” does not obligate the federal government to award a proportionate sum of money on all states and would not be bound by contentious congressional votes.

Evidently, this is a shared responsibility since both the state and federal governments have a bearing on the progress of the program. The state government provides the proposals and is responsible for the implementation of the plans. The federal government on its part is responsible for funding and ensuring that the state governments operate within the set guidelines. However, it is worth noting that the program has been moving towards state control rather than federal control. This is especially having in mind that the states have a considerable space for shaping their participation in the federal initiatives, not to mention the expanded resources and enhanced regulatory authority for their participation (Ralston, 4). This, however, does not in any way imply that the program allows for general power devolution, rather it serves the progressive policy. It is worth noting that the states have real choices pertaining to their accomplishment of the federal policy priorities, instead of just having them as administrative go-betweens that only write reports and issue checks. In essence, the program reaffirms the status of the states as sovereign entities with responsibility for and authority over the welfare of their citizens (Ralston 6).

Works cited

Metzger, Gillian, E. Federalism under Obama. Columbia University. 2011. Print

Ralston, Sonja. Race to the Top Embraces Federalism. American Constitution Society. 2010. Web retrieved 3rd June 2012 from, HYPERLINK “http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/race-to-the-top-embraces-federalism” http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/race-to-the-top-embraces-federalism