Federal Funding and the New Regionalism: Blurring the Lines of Federalism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2005 Federal Funding and the New Regionalism: Blurring the Lines of Federalism Lori Adele Riverstone University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Riverstone, Lori Adele, "Federal Funding and the New Regionalism: Blurring the Lines of Federalism. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2005. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4334 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Lori Adele Riverstone entitled "Federal Funding and the New Regionalism: Blurring the Lines of Federalism." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Political Science. Patricia Freeland, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: David Houston, Ron Foresta, Bob Cunningham Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I amsubmitting herewith a dissertationwritten by Lori Adele Riverstone entitled "Federal Funding andthe New Regionalism: Blurringtqe Lines of Federalism."I have examined the final papercopy of this dissertationfor formand content and recommend thatit beaccepted in partialfulfillment of the requirementsfor the degreeof Doctorof Philosophy, with a major in Political Science. PatriciaFreeland, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: ��,r�-- ((A-717�5c Accepted for the Counci Vice Chancellor and Graduate Studies FEDERALFUNDING AND THE NEW REGIONALISM: BLURRING THE LINES OF FEDERALISM A Dissertation Presented forthe Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Lori A. Riverstone May 2005 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to those who have supported my ambition, believed in my ability, and praised my progress over the years. To my grandmother, mother, sister, the rest of my family,and to David Mill. Special thanksto you, Eric, forbelieving in me, supporting me, and loving me. Andto Bret, Nicholas, and Zachary: For most of your lives your mother has had her head in a book. The factthat we love and know one another is no tribute to me, but to each of you. You have tolerated my absence selflessly, and have cheered me without fail. This work is dedicated especially to you. lll . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to acknowledge the very special people who have helped me complete the Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science. Thanks to Dr. Pat Freeland, my major professor. Your friendship, advice, and suggestions went farin the development and completion of this project. I would also like to acknowledge my other committee members for their support anddirection: Drs. Bob Cunningham,Ron Foresta, and David Houston. Special thanksto Dr. Bob Cunninghamwho has become an invaluable mentor andfriend and to Dr. JanetKelly who gave me direction, taught me the field, and showed me the ropes. I am indebted to Dr. James Lloyd who employed me first as a student, then as the manager of the Tennessee Newspaper Project. That opportunity afforded me the ability to support my family while attending graduateschool. Without his support during those years, my lifewould be considerably differenttoday. I am especially gratefulfor my family and friends whose tireless encouragement made this work possible V ABSTRACT For decades urban plannersand political scientists have attempted to deal with the problems associated with urbanization. Rapid population growth and the fragmentationof our metropolitan areas have caused ongoing and ever-increasing problems such as air, water, and land pollution; high crime rates; disparitiesin quality of education; a persistent racial divide; and trafficcongestion, to name only a few. One solution, regionalism, gained grand-scalepolitical support in the mid-twentieth century only to decline in the 1980s with the Reagan administration. In the 20 yearsleading up to Reagan's policy of devolution, the national governmentwas invested in fosteringmulti-jurisdictional relationships. These cooperative councils of governmentswere to develop comprehensive regional plans for futureregional development while attempting to resolve existing urban issues through region-wide initiatives. However, with devolution, regional councils lost their authority and the federalrevenue stream dried up; as a result, regional planningand cooperation fellout of favor. Since the mid-1990s, there has been an enormous re-growthin regional partnershipsand academic interest in regionalism. Today's voluntarypartnerships find theoretical footingin the 'new regionalism,' a movement that has gained momentum with a number of state and local governments,federal agencies, and scholars. In spite of this support, regional effortsare, and have always been, difficultto establish and maintain for a varietyof political and economic reasons. Regionalism in the 1970s occurred, forthe most part, because of the federalgovernment's infusionof fundingand authority in the regional council (Atkins and Wilson-Gentry, 1992; Grigsby, 1996). With devolution, that fundingand authority was revoked. So why are local governments cooperating on a vu regional level today? To answer that question, researchers have begun to explore existing regional councils in search of key determinants of their formationand ongoing participation. Suggested_motives include a history ofregional cooperation (Ostrom, 1998), and the pressure of an unmet need that cannotbe resolved by council members acting independently (Olberding, 2002). To determine the extent towhich the federal governmentis again playing a role, this research seeks to reintroduce the influenceof federalfunding to the list of key determinants. Vlll TABLEOF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1. THE NEW REGIONALISM AND OUR FEDERAL DEMOCRACY 1 Introduction 1 Background 5 Purpose of this Study 8 The Chapters 9 2. OUR FEDERAL DEMOCRACY 11 Federalism and the States 15 The Importance of Local Governments 29 3. URBANIZATIONAND ITS PROBLEMS 35 The Role of Citizen Participation 39 4. TRADITIONAL REGIONALISM AND COGS 45 Early Regionalism 45 Councils of Government 47 The Formalizationof COG Powers 49 �... Regionalism in the 1970s-Top Down Authority 49 The Waningof Power: COGs in the 1980s and Early 1990s 51 RegionalCouncils Today 53 5. NEW REGIONALISM ANDTHE 1990s: COOPERATIVE GOVERNANCE? 59 New Regionalism in Theory 63 What Drives Regional Cooperation? 65 Potential Problems with Regional Cooperation 67 SuccessfulRegionalism: Transportation andEnvironmental Efforts 69 Clean Air Act andEnvironmental Partnerships 70 lX MetropolitanPlanning Organizations/Transportation 72 Summary 77 6. DATA AND METHODS 81 Data and Subject Selection 81 Survey Implementation 82 Research Expectations 82 7. FINDINGS 93 Descriptives 93 CouncilDesignations 93 Council Objectives 97 Council Funding 106 Council Authority 110 Citizen Participation 119 Board Composition 122 Summaryof Findings 126 Council Designations 126 Council Objectives 127 Council Funding 128 Council Authority 129 Citizen Participation 130 8. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 133 Suggestions forFuture Research 140 BIBLIOGRAPHY 143 X APPENDICES 159 Appendix A: Regional Councils in the United States: Survey Respondents 160 Appendix B: SurveyInstrument 167 Appendix C: Additional Tables 175 VITA 181 Xl LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 The Evolution of Federalism in America 16 4.1 Historical Eras andPerspectives of Regionalism 46 4.2 Life andPower Cycles of Regional Councils of Government 48 5.1 Forms of Intergovernmental Cooperation Accordingto Political 62 Difficulty 5.2 Selected Projects Funded by !STEA & TEA-21 (FY92-FY01) 76 7.1 Total Population andRespondents by Census Division 94 7.2 Responding Councils According to Unique Designation 95 7.3 Council Designations According to Functional Category 97 7.4 Distribution of Council Designations 98 7.5 Rankingof Councils' Top Three Objectives 99 7.6 Distribution of Council Objectives According to Functional Category 100 7.7 Distribution of Councils' Top Objective 101 7.8 Distribution: Any One of Councils' Top Three Objectives 101 7.9 The Top Three Objectives of Regional Councils of Government 102 7.10 BivariateAnalyses: Focus on Transportationby Council Designation 105 7.11 Percentages of Funding by Source 107 7.12 MeanPercents According to Funding Source 108 7.13 MeanPercents: Sources of Funding by Council Top Objective 108 Category 7.14 Results of Analysis: Funding Sources forTop Objective Categories 110 7.15 Authority According to Top Ten Objectives 112 7.16 Results of Analyses: Authority According to TransportationTop 115 Objective Category 7.17 Results of Analyses: Authority According to Economic Development 115 Top Objective Category 7.18 Results of Analyses: Authority According to Environment Top 116 Objective Category 7.19 Results of Analyses: Authority According to Social Services Top 116 Objective Category