Comparing The States And Dua Dual Federalism

742 Words3 Pages

The federal government and the states work side-by-side. Each have different powers and responsibilities in the government. Both are necessary for federalism. Since the beginning the two forms of government have been in a never-ending quarrel over uneven power balances. Through the years it has shown many power shifts, gains and losses, but the federal government always comes out on top. The creation of a strong national government from the Constitution was meant to reverse the problems created by the Articles of Confederation. America now had a central government, not just state governments. The central government could now, “collect taxes, raise an army, regulate interstate commerce, etc.” This gave the federal government a lot of power that was nonexistent before. “…Authority of the new federal gov. to enforce its laws against individuals.” This meant that now there was a judicial branch established separate from state courts. Anti-Federalist feared this form of government and thought the central government was tyrannical. The federal power then decreased with the 10th amendment "tent gave state power" this put people at ease seeing the states had the power to fight back against the central government. They could also protect their own rights with this new amendment. …show more content…

"Dual federalism… Protect states from federal governments and then federal government from states." This way neither could be taken over by the other. They were separate but equal. Though, the federal government still reigns supreme. The central government still passed out grants, mandates, and other ways of controlling how the states operate. "The doctrine was crippled with FDR now as president and later abandoned in 1941…" Because of the end of dual federalism the federal government was yet again increasing power since it was no longer held back by the Supreme Court's