University of Nebraska at Omaha DigitalCommons@UNO

Public Administration Faculty Publications School of

6-1993 American , , and Public : Weaving Together Loose Theoretical Threads Dale Krane University of Nebraska at Omaha, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/pubadfacpub Part of the Public Affairs, and Public Administration Commons

Recommended Citation Krane, Dale, "American Federalism, State Governments, and Public Policy: Weaving Together Loose Theoretical Threads" (1993). Public Administration Faculty Publications. 13. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/pubadfacpub/13

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Public Administration at DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Administration Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Symposium: Federalism

Courant, Paul and Daniel Rubinfeld. 1987. Administration Review 51 (May/June): or Representatives (June 13): 53-55. "Tax Reform: Implications for the State­ 240-53. Shannon, John. 1990. "The Deregulation of Local Public Sector.'' The Journal of Kenyon, Daphne and John Kincaid, eds. the American Federal System: 1789- Economic Perspectives I (Summer): 1991. Competition Among States and 1989." In The Changing Face of Fiscal 87-100. Local Governments. Washington, DC: Federalism, eds. Thomas R. Swartz and Derthick, Martha. 1978. "American Federal­ The Urban Institute Press. John E. Peck. Armonk, NY: M.E. ism: Madison's 'Middle Ground' in the Ketti, Donald F. 1989. "Expansion and Pro­ Sharpe, Inc.: 17-34. 1980s." Public Administration Review 47 tection in the Budgetary Process." Public Shannon, John. 1987. "The Return to Fend­ (January/February): 66-74. Administration Review 49 (May/June): for-Yourself Federalism: The Reagan Dye, Thomas R. 1990. American Federalism: 231-39. Mark." Intergovernmental Perspective 13 Competition Among Governments. Lex­ Kincaid, John. 1988. "The New Judicial (Summer/Fall): 34-37. ington, MA: Lexington Books. Federalism." The Journal of State Gov­ Schwartz, Joe and Thomas Exter. 1989. "All Feagin, Joseph R. 1989. The Free Enterprise ernment 61 (September/October): 163-69. Our Children." American Demographics City. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Ladd, Helen and John Yinger. 1990. II (May): 34-37. Press. America's Ailing Cities: Fiscal Health and Squires, Gregory D. 1989. "Public-Private Fisher, Ronald C. 1988. State and Local the Design of Urban Policy. Baltimore, Partnerships: Who Gets What and Why?" Public Finance. Glenview, IL: Scott, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. In Unequal Partnerships, ed. Gregory D. Foresman and Company. Nasar, Sylvia. 1993. "National Recovery Squires. New York: Basic Books: I-ll. Gage, Robert W. and Myrna P. Mandell, eds. Fattening Tax Revenue in Many States." Swartz, Thomas R. and John E. Peck, eds. 1990. Strategies for Managing Inter­ New York Times, February 17: I, Dl8. 1990. The Changing Face of Fiscal Fed­ governmental and Networks. New Nathan, Richard P., Fred C. Doolittle, and eralism. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. York: Praeger. Associates. 1987. Reagan and the States. U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovern­ Garreau, Joel. 1991. Edge City: Life on the Princeton, NJ: Princeton University mental Relations. 1985. The Question of New Frontier. New York: Doubleday. Press. Swte Capability. Washing­ Gold, Steven D. 1992. "The Federal Role in Nathan, Richard P. and J. R. Lago. 1988. ton, DC: ACIR. Number A-98. State Fiscal Stress." Pub/ius: The Journal "Intergovernmental Relations in the Van Horn, Carl E. 1989 and 1993. The State of Federalism 22 (Summer): 33-47. Reagan Era." Public Budgeting and of the States. Washington, DC: Congres­ Gold, Steven D. 1989. Reforming State-Local Finance 8 (Fall): 15-29. sional Quarterly Inc. Relations: A Practical Guide. Denver: National Conference of State . Welch, Susan. 1985. "The More for Less National Conference of State Legislatures. 1993. "Issues Outlook 1993: A Survey of Paradox: Public Attitudes on Taxing and Hughes, James W. 1992. "Demographic and State Legislative Priorities." Denver: Spending." Public Opinion Quarterly 49 Economic Parameters: The National National Conference of State Legislatures. (3): 310-16. Framework." Paper presented at "The Osborne, David and Ted Gaebler. 1992. Wildavsky, Aaron. 1988. The New Future of Small Cities: Pennsylvania" Reinventing Government. Reading, MA: of the Budgetary Process. Glenview, IL: conference. Easton, P A: Lafayette Col­ Addison Wesley. Scott, Foresman. lege, November 5-6. Regens, James and Thomas Lauth. 1993. Hughes, James W., K. Tyler Miller, and "Buy Now, Pay Later: Trends in State Robert Lang. 1992. The New Geography Indebtedness, 1950-89." Public Admin­ of Services and Office Buildings, A Rut­ istration Review 52 (March/April): About the Author gers Regional Report. New Brunswick, 146-56. NJ: Rutgers University Center for Urban Reich, Robert. 1990. The Work of Nations. Beverly A. Cigler is a professor of public Policy Research. New York: Random House. policy and administration at Penn State Joyce, Philip and Daniel Mullins. 1991. "The Shannon, John. 1991. "Testimony on the Harrisburg. Her research centers on the poli­ Changing Fiscal Structure of the State and Fiscal Condition of State and Local Gov­ tics, management, and policies of subnational Local Public Sector: The Impact of Tax ernments." Presented at a Hearing before governments, especially state-local capacity­ and Expenditure Limitations." Public the Committee on the Budget, U.S. House building, alternative service delivery, and multicommunity collaboration.

American Federalism, State Governments, and Public Policy: Weaving Together Loose Theoretical Threads

Dale Krane, The University of Nebraska at Omaha

Decisions about the provision and Many conventional models of with the corpus of work available delivery of public goods and services policy making give little place to fed­ on American federalism. take place within the framework eral arrangements or to the factors Compounding this lack of con­ established by America's most dis­ that sustain American federalism. ceptual integration between federal­ tinctive political invention-federal­ Equally problematic, efforts to ism and policy-making studies is the ism. Author after author reminds model federalism often do not take continuing tendency to downplay or students and scholars alike that advantage of the conceptually more even ignore the activities and influ­ policy making can be understood developed policy making literature. ence of state governments. To use only from an intergovernmental per­ An unfortunate consequence of this states as an observational unit of spective. But to use a term such as "separateness" is the regular appear­ analysis is not the same as granting ''intergovernmental policy making'' ance of policy studies with hypothe­ state governments the explanatory thrusts one into two distinctive ses or conclusions that could have status of a "structural variable" analytic worlds which, at best, are been easily explained or predicted (Scheuch 1969; Ragin 1987). loosely woven together. had the author been more familiar Although information about states

186 PS: & Politics American f'ederalism comprises the data bases for numer­ ceptual framework or a model that conceptual devices do a better ous intergovernmental and policy links the components of federal orga­ explanatory job than others. Iron tri­ analyses, nevertheless, states are not nization to the formulation, adop­ angles, for example, offer little accorded an explanatory role com­ tion, or implementation of policy. By heuristic value in explaining specific mensurate with their: impact on forgetting the considerable body of instances of state officials derailing public policy. writing on American federalism, presidential , such as the The two essays on public policy policy analysts continue to produce National Governors Association's analysis by Susan Hansen and on research findings that could have bipartisan resistance that doomed federalism by David Beam et al. in been easily explained or derived from Reagan's "turnback and swap" pro­ Political Science: The State of the the intergovernmental literature. posal to devolve programs to the Discipline (Finifter 1983) confirm the For too long as well, federalism states. On the other hand, diffusion striking separation of federalism/ scholars have contributed to the of innovation models offers clear intergovernmental relations from neglect of intergovernmental aspects insights into the growing influence of policy analysis. For example, Hansen in policy modeling. Inability to make state policy initiatives that arrive on (239) in her conclusion notes that the progress on ending the theoretical the national agenda and are ultimate­ distinctive contribution political sci­ weakness of federal studies has not ly adopted (e.g., education reform, entists can play in policy analysis, in prompted others to turn to the sub­ environmental protection, health contrast to that of economists, is field for useful concepts. Second, the care, and "workfare"). " ... to pose questions about admin­ short supply of detailed information, Even agenda-setting models, prob­ istrative effectiveness or organiza­ other than fiscal information, about ably the most sophisticated frame­ tional structures .... " But Hansen's many aspects of state and local gov­ work for exploring policy formula­ review of the development of policy ernment make it difficult to discover tion, downplay the impact of the studies demonstrates that models of cross-state or cross-level patterns. In federal matrix. State government the policy process up to 1983 did lit­ some cases, it is easier to engage in officials, because of their place in tle to incorporate federal features or cross-national research than it is to American federalism, have a number state governments as explanatory do comparative state or intergovern­ of doors, not just windows, into the variables. Beam and his co-authors mental research. Third, the methodo­ larger national policy process. Wright (271) acknowledge the atheoretical logical and cost challenges of con­ (1988, 275) identified nine issue areas character of federalism studies. To ducting research across several states, in which governors can work to improve theorizing about federalism, as exemplified by the field network shape national policy. Governors also they recommend a strategy which strategy, require substantial possess a freedom of action that includes " ... a fuller recognition resources. encompasses personal contact with that the national government now presidents, strategy sessions with depends very heavily upon state and their state congressional delegation, local governments. . . . '' They go on Models of Policy Formulation negotiations with federal administra­ to note "the need to link . . . " tors, and mobilization of public policy studies to federalism research. Of course, the manner and the opinion in their home state and degree to which federalism/inter­ throughout the nation. "Forgotten Federalism" governmental relations intertwine Other state government officials with policy making depends on the also possess the capacity and Hamilton and Wells (1990, 1) phase of the policy process one has resources by which to influence unabashedly declare that "federalism under consideration. Widely accepted national policy (see Krane 1993). A is simply too often forgotten." A models of policy formulation such as covert example of state power over quick perusal of common public iron triangles, issue networks, and national policy can be found in the policy textbooks confirms their agenda-building offer scant reference 1991 reports from state capitals that assessment. While not "forgetting" to federal arrangements or to the state were using the decen­ federalism completely, policy text­ diversity of subnational cultures and nial process of redrawing congres­ books pay brief homage to America's place-based interests that dynamically sional districts as a bargaining chip federal government. Federalism is support and are sustained by Ameri­ to extract policy promises from con­ depicted as a contextual feature can federalism. PIGs, or intergovern­ gressional incumbents. The point which conditions the behavior of mental lobbies, are categorized as here is simple: policy models that individuals and groups, typically just one more interest group in the assign federalism to a contextual role expressed as "federalism disperses "policy soup." Certainly, states and which only creates complications or power" or ". . . permits policy localities behave as pressure groups; obstacles to action miss the funda­ diversity." This ritualistic recognition but their constitutional status em­ mental fact that subnational officials of federalism includes some com­ powers them with legitimate author­ are actors whose preferences embody bination of the following topics: ity not exercised by other types of the interests of a particular jurisdic­ reasons for federalism, historical groups as well as institutional access tion. Put more simply, American fed­ eras, the grant system, and the com­ not available to other interests. eralism is more than a maze of insti­ plications for policy makers. Seldom With so many competing policy tutions; it is a matrix of reciprocal are students presented with a con- models, it is only natural that some power relations.

June 1993 187 Symposium: Federalism

Models of turn affects the ability to integrate istration, urban politics, and law I Policy Implementation welfare reform with education, train­ courts/judicial politics. MacManus ing, and employment programs, (212) goes on to review "new Although implementation research many of which remain locally based. theories and findings" about federal­ from its earliest beginnings acknowl­ What is conceptually striking ism and concludes that "the study of edged the intergovernmental dimen­ about many implementation models federalism and intergovernmental sions of the policy process, the role (of either direction) is the lack of relations is now part of the political of state governments in policy imple­ attention to two of the earliest and science 'mainstream' " and "today mentation models has been cast in a best articulated frameworks, both of many researchers in our subfield are curiously emasculated fashion. For which begin with the attributes of the among the profession's leading schol­ example, top-down models view im­ federal system. Pressman (1975) ars and association leaders." plementation as a rational-technical developed a "donor-recipient" MacManus is correct in her assess­ process of assembling the necessary model of the grant-in-aid process ment of federalism's return from the elements needed to penetrate through that explicitly incorporated the inter­ conceptual wilderness. However, for "bureaucratic-political" layers to the jurisdictional conflict, mutual depen­ the renaissance in federalism studies policy's target beneficiaries. Success­ dence, and power asymmetry of to continue, the loose weaving of ful top-down implementation American federalism. Williams (1980) federalism with policy models must depends on marshalling enough set forth a "shared governance" be tightened. One can see the need resources (money, trained personnel, model of the "uneasy partnership" for transcending the treatment of facilities) to overcome the complexity within federal programs. Only with intergovernmental relations as a con­ of joint action, provided the national textual variable in policy studies by policy goals are sufficiently clear. reviewing the changing fortunes of The conceptual keys to implementa­ American federalism is American federalism in the premier tion are three: the tractability of the policy textbook. problem, the capacity built into the more than a maze of If one revisits the first edition statute, and the prevailing contextual (1972) of Thomas Dye's Understand­ conditions. Little acknowledgement is institutions; it is a matrix ing Public Policy, the widely used given, for example, to "picket-fence of reciprocal power and influential undergraduate text­ federalism" which as a description of book, one finds no mention of fed­ implementation pre-dates the top­ relations. eralism or intergovernmental rela­ down models, and even less recogni­ tions. There is, however, a chapter tion is given to the obvious point devoted to "a systems analysis of that the multi-layered, multi-actor the "third generation" of implemen­ state policies.'' A separate chapter on "picket-fence" creates the necessity tation studies has the capacity of American federalism did not appear to infuse policies with enough capac­ states and localities to act as "power until the fifth edition (1984) and its ity to overcome the complexity of wielders" (Pressman's term) been historical (e.g., changes in federalism joint action (e.g., sufficient funds restored to the status of an explana­ from dual to cooperative) and de­ with which to purchase compliance tory variable. scriptive (e.g., block versus categor­ from reluctant states). ical grants) treatment of federalism Bottom-up models stress the carried over to the sixth edition potential for deflection or distortion A Resurgence of (1987). In the current seventh edition of national policy by local authori­ State Governments as an (1992, 307-10) Dye has added, for ties. The encounter of street-level Explanatory Variable the first time, a section which bureaucrats with program clients is analyzes through the lens of public reputed to be the defining moment Lack of attention to American fed­ choice theory the impact of intergov­ that actualizes the policy mandate. eralism in explanations of public ernmental competition on various Local action that is faithful to policy may be coming to an end. The types of policy (also see Dye 1990). national objectives serves as the post-1960 revitalization of state gov­ No doubt this theoretical break­ benchmark for successful bottom-up ernments, the growing demands to through is a harbinger of models to implementation. While bottom-up devolve public policy, and the come, but improved theorizing about models recognize the autonomy national government's own fiscal dis­ federalism also needs to be infused granted to subnational authorities by tress have thrust state governments into models of the policy process. federalism, these behavioral-realist and American federalism back onto Other signs that the paths of fed­ models sometimes so narrow their the agenda of both policy makers eralism and policy studies may be conceptual focus as to obscure the and model makers. Susan MacManus converging can be found in recent impact of state government on local (1991, 203-54), in her "Looking to scholarship. Jack Treadway (1985) actions. For example, the administra­ the Future" essay, cites figures that summarizes twenty years of the poli­ tion of welfare programs over the indicate many members of the APSA tics versus environment debate over past twenty years has changed in Organized Section on Federalism and policy outputs and uses his critical important ways as a result of state Intergovernmental Relations also review to produce a model of the government takeover of the old belong to another section, in par­ state policy-making process that com­ county welfare office. This change in ticular public policy, public admin- bines national and state level features

188 PS: Political Science & Politics American Federalism

(including state political culture). change, an integrative model would Thomas Anton (1989, v) proposes a have to focus on activities which References shape institutions and policies over "benefits coalition" framework to Anton, Thomas J. 1989. American Federal­ explain how " ... the interrelation­ time, such as decision making. A ism and Public Policy: How the System ships among levels [of government] fourth epistemological point that can Works. New York: Random House. that are the defining characteristics rip the fabric of theory is over­ Beam, David R., Timothy J. Conlan, and of American public policies." reliance on a single type of informa­ David B. Walker. 1983. "Federalism: The tion (e.g., fiscal data). Working with Challenge of Conflicting Theories and Robertson and Judd's (1989) policy Contemporary Practice." In Political Sci­ text adopts a "new institutionalism" a small number of data threads not ence: The State of the Discipline, ed. Ada approach which emphasizes the inde­ only diminishes the richness of the W. Finifter. Washington, DC: The Ameri­ pendent role of government in the theoretical pattern, but also reduces can Political Science Association. policy making process. Paul Sabatier its generalizability; that is to say, the Derthick, Martha. 1992. "Up-to-Date in Kansas City: Reflections on American (1991), in laying out some directions theoretical cloth produced will have Federalism." PS: Political Science & for "better theories of the policy too many holes. 1 Politics 25: 671-75. process," describes three models, What kind of loom will weave Dye, Thomas R. 1972. Understanding Public each of which holds that government together the threads of federalism Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice­ and public policy? Over the last ten Hall. institutions are a critical explanatory Dye, Thomas R. 1990. American Federalism: variable for understanding public years there has been a lessening of Competition among Governments. Lex­ policy. the optimism that a theory of politics ington, MA: D.C. Heath. can be constructed by ignoring polit­ Finifter, Ada W., ed. 1983. Political Science: ical institutions (March and Olsen The State of the Discipline. Washington, 1984). The "new institutionalism" DC: The American Political Science Weaving Together Association. and the nascent theory of "policy Gillespie, Judith A. and Dina A. Zinnes, eds. Loose Theoretical Threads design" share a theoretical concern 1982. Missing Elements in Political Research on American federalism, with understanding the effects of dif­ Inquiry: Logic and Levels of Analysis. ferent institutional structures on the Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. state governments, and public policy Hamilton, Christopher and Donald T. Wells. has produced two extensive fabrics of behavior of individuals. The search 1990. Federalism, Power, and Political information that demonstrate it is for a "structural logic of policy" Economy: A New Theory of Federalism's possible to accumulate knowledge which " ... will contribute to a more Impact on American Life. Englewood refined understanding of the role of Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. without substantial synthesis. In Hansen, Susan B. 1983. "Public Policy order to move toward more coher­ institutional factors in policy design'' Analysis: Some Recent Developments and ence and integration of federal (Linder and Peters 1990, 103) closely Current Problems." In Political Science: studies with policy analysis, a matches the message of the "new The State of the Discipline, ed. Ada W. number of epistemological problems institutionalism''-' 'the organization Finifter. Washington, DC: The American of political life makes a difference." Political Science Association. will have to be addressed. The list Gillespie, Judith A. 1982. "Introduction: offered here is not a complete item­ Efforts to increase the complement­ Some Basic Puzzles in Political Inquiry.'' ization of the many sharp philosoph­ arity of rational choice models with In Missing Elements in Political Inquiry: ical points that can snag the warp institutional analysis appear to hold Logic and Levels of Analysis, ed. Judith great potential for avoiding many of A. Gillespie and Dina A. Zinnes. Beverly and woof of theory; instead the Hills, CA: Sage. points raised here are illustrative of the snags to an integrative theory Job, Brian L. 1982. "Synthesis: Problems the challenges of weaving together (Ostrom 1991). and Prospect in Dynamic Modeling." In the threads of different subfields. Only by weaving together the sep­ Missing Elements in Political Inquiry: One snag is the "combined­ arate strands of federal studies with Logic and Levels of Analysis, ed. Judith policy analysis can instructors help A. Gillespie and Dina A. Zinnes. Beverly effects" problem that is also encoun­ Hills, CA: Sage. tered in the study of international their students understand why Krane, Dale. 1993. "State Efforts to Influ­ relations. Interaction between two (or Martha Derthick (1992, 675), in ence Federal Policy." In Welfare System more) governments or organizations delivering the 1992 Gaus Lecture, Reform: Coordinating Federal, State, and revealed that she was seriously think­ Local Programs, ed. Edward T. Jennings, requires (1) identification of the Jr. and Neal Zank. Westport, CT: Green­ internal and external factors that ing of petitioning a federal judge for wood Press. account for phenomenon under study the right to vote in California. The Linder, Stephen H. and B. Guy Peters. 1990. and (2) determination of the relative reason she offered for this secret "The Design of Instruments for Public causal strength of each factor. These desire was her realization that in Policy." In Policy Theory and Policy many policy areas she was governed Evaluation: Concepts, Knowledge, "combined-effects" produce another Causes, and Norms, chap. 7, ed. Stuart S. tangle: that of multiple units of by the state of California, even Nagel. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. analysis. Both policy and federal though she lived in Virginia! MacManus, Susan A. 1991. "Federalism and studies struggle with the linkage of Intergovernmental Relations: The Central­ ization versus Debate individuals and institutions, especially Continues." In Political Science: Looking when the boundaries of organiza­ Note to the Future, Vol. 4: American Institu­ tional or jurisdictional units are tions, ed. William Crotty. Evanston, IL: "blurred." Third, the dynamics of I. The points raised in this paragraph Northwestern University Press. derive from the discussions of shortcomings March, James G. and John P. Olsen. 1984. the policy process coupled with the in political inquiry found in Gillespie and "The New Institutionalism: Organiza­ flux in federal institutions tear at Zinnes (1982), especially the essays by Judith tional Factors in Political Life." Ameri­ any static theory. To cope with Gillespie, Brian Job, and J. Donald Moon. can Political Science Review 78: 734-49. June 1993 189 Symposium: Federalism

Moon, J. Donald. 1982. "Introduction: Two 1989. The Development of American governmental Relations, 3rd ed. Pacific Views of Integrative Models." In Missing Public Policy: The Structure of Policy Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Elements in Political Inquiry: Logic and Restraint. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Levels of Analysis, ed. Judith A. Gillespie Sabatier, Paul A. 1991. "Toward Better and Dina A. Zinnes. Beverly Hills, CA: Theories of the Policy Process." PS: Sage. Political Science & Politics 24: 147-56. Ostrom, Elinor. 1991. "Rational Choice Scheuch, Erwin K. 1%9. "Social Context and Theory and Institutional Analysis: Individual Behavior." In Quantitative Toward Complementarity." American Ecological Analysis in the Social Sciences, About the Author Political Science Review 85: 237-43. ed. Mattei Dogan and Stein Rokkan. Pressman, Jeffrey L. 1975. Federal Programs Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press. Dale Krane is professor of public admin­ and City Politics: The Dynamics of the Treadway, Jack M. 1985. Public Policy­ istration at the University of Nebraska at Aid Process in Oakland. Berkeley: Uni­ making in the American States. New Omaha. He is a co-author of Compromised versity of California Press. York: Praeger. Compliance: Implementation of the 1965 Ragin, Charles C. 1987. The Comparative Williams, Walter. 1980. The Implementation Rights Act and Mississippi Govern­ Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Perspective: A Guide for Managing Social ment and Politics: Modernizers versus Tradi­ Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: Univer­ Service Delivery Programs. Berkeley: Uni­ tionalists. Currently, he is studying inter­ sity of California Press. versity of California Press. agency coordination (or its lack) in the imple­ Robertson, David B. and Dennis R. Judd. Wright, Deil S. 1988. Understanding Inter- mentation of "workfare."

International and Comparative Federalism

Daniel J. Elazar, Bar Ilan University and Temple University

Federalism has become a major Federalism on the Agenda continuous control over the general issue in world affairs and conse­ government which must work quently in political science after It is increasingly clear that federal­ through them to reach the citizenry. many years of being ignored as a ism itself, to use a biological analogy, The of individual units may proper subject for political study is a genus that includes several be possible by prior constitutional except as intergovernmental relations species (Elazar 1987). One, federa­ agreement without general consent. in specifically federal systems, tion, what most people today refer to Classic include the especially in the United States. Fed­ as federalism, is the form of govern­ Greek Achaean League and the eralism should be understood both in ment invented by the founding United Provinces of the . its narrower sense as intergovernmen­ fathers of the United States in the The best modern example is the tal relations and in its larger sense as of 1787 (Diamond 1959; European Community (Hughes 1963; the combination of self-rule and Ostrom 1986). It establishes a com­ Elazar 1987; Elazar 1982). shared rule through constitutional­ mon general government in which to A third species is federacy, an ized power sharing in a noncentral­ form a polity, constituent units asymmetrical relationship between a ized basis. both govern themselves and share and a larger federate Initially, comparative studies of a common constitutional govern­ power, providing for potential union federalism could be classified in three ment of the whole. Powers are on the basis of the federated state general groupings: delegated to the former by the people maintaining greater internal auton­ of all the units. Its dissolution can omy by foregoing certain forms of (I) federalism in the English­ only come about through the consent participation in the governance of the speaking world, particularly the of all or a majority of its constituent federate power. In the United States British , including imper­ units. The general government has this kind of arrangement is called ial federalism (Davis 1978; King direct access to every citizen and "commonwealth." Both 1982; Wheare 1964); supremacy in those areas in which it and the Northern Marianas are fed­ (2) federalism in the German­ is granted authority (Wheare 1953; eracies (Friedrich 1968; Elazar 1987). speaking world, particularly Ger­ King 1982; Duchacek 1970). Arche­ A fourth species, ­ many and Switzerland (Frenkel typical modern include hood, is similar to federacy in the 1984; Ester bauer, Heraud and the United States, Switzerland, and way that is similar to Pernthaler 1977); and (Frenkel 1977; Smiley 1980). . Both are equally asym­ (3) federalistic and A second, confederation, was the metrical but in associated statehood, schemes, mostly presented by accepted form of federalism prior to the federate state is less bound to the philosophic advocates of federal­ 1787. In a confederation, the con­ federate power, and the constitution ism as a utopian system (Marc stituent units form a union but retain which binds them usually has provi­ 1948; Marc and Aron 1948; most sovereign and constituent sions for the severance of ties Stevens 1977). powers. They establish and maintain between the two under certain speci-

190 PS: Political Science & Politics