ABSTRACT
American federalism has experienced three major phases of historical development: dual, cooperative, and regulatory or coercive. The first two have been widely recognized and continue to shape the federal system. The third phase has been subject to debate largely because it corresponds historically to the rise and expansion of contemporary academic scholarship, which focuses on numerous aspects of the American federal system in ways that were not possible during the eras of dual and cooperative federalism. Several hundred “new” federalism terms have been coined over the past 45 years; yet so many new federalisms cannot possibly be accurate descriptors of American federalism. Many of them are mistakenly retrospective, as with “contractive” federalism, which in 1988 Deil Wright used to predict a long-term decline in federal aid just as federal grants began a spectacular increase. The fundamentals of regulatory or coercive federalism have remained the same for 45 years; that is, grants-in-aid and attached conditions have proliferated; federal aid has shifted from places to persons, reducing funds available for state and local public investments in non-social welfare programs; federal mandates, preemptions, court orders, and criminal laws have increased steadily; institutions of intergovernmental cooperation have been dismantled; and the federal government has constrained state taxation. There has been no “new” federalism since the rise of coercive federalism in the late 1960s. Despite the partisan nature of IGR policies, cooperative federalism is still widely practiced in the implementation of national programs. Despite Trump Administration efforts to enact major changes, the clear majority of intergovernmental programs will continue to function as usual.
