Across America’s history, federalism has been defined in different ways. Cooperative federalism implies that the two forms of government are to work in collaboration with one another. Dual federalism supposes that the two forms of government are working separate from one another. Creative federalism relates to a combined planning and decision making system amongst the two. Horizontal federalism relates to the interaction and shared programs amongst them while vertical federalism means the conventional systems of federal governance whereby the actions of the central government are considered to be supreme as interpreted by the constitution. Every state in the US is characterized with its own positions relative to legal authority and political importance. Although states are not considered sovereign entities they can assume power and take actions relative to the functions of other governmental set ups (McKAY, 2001). The US Constitution had established division of authority amongst the state and federal governments that had initially put restraints on the federal government in areas of foreign policy, defense and the controls over currency and commerce amongst states. Over time, this bifurcation of authority has been diluted and currently the federal government enjoys extended authority relative to almost aspects impacting US citizens. However, despite such increase in federal authority, states in the US continue being very significant centers of governmental functioning. Over the years, there have been different policies enacted by different Presidents in regard to reducing the federal government’s powers and vice versa....
This essya stresses that federalism is understood as a governance system whereby the constitution partitions power amongst the state and central governments and both governments take direct actions relative to the people they rule, in terms of the prevailing laws. It is understood that both entities are supreme in the context of their respective spheres of authority. The central and state governments are required to give their consent in the event of proposals being made for changing the constitution. Very rarely does federalism appear in discussions and debates pertaining to modern public policies. A good feature of federalism is that it retains power, traditions and local dignity while permitting the central government to deal with common issues.
This paper makes a conclusion that the founders of the Constitution displayed a great deal of loyalty towards their respective states and were not inclined to provide unlimited powers to the central government. While framing the Constitution, the founders created a document that greatly succeeded in bifurcating powers while creating a balance in favor of the nation as a whole. However, it is widely perceived that over the decades the US has diverted from what was intended by the founders of the Constitution because the original intent was not to provide the federal government with extensive authority over issues relative to law enforcement, housing and education