This article synthesizes and interprets contemporary research on the changing relationships between American federalism and the U.S. political system. It does so by examining how three important political trends—nationalization, polarization, and delegitimation—have affected intergovernmental relations and intergovernmental policy across a range of venues: electoral politics, policymaking, and public administration. In each of these areas, traditional scholarly perspectives on the relationship between federalism and the political system are contrasted with the findings of contemporary research and analysis.
AbramowitzAlanWebsterSteven. 2015. All politics is national: The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. house and senate elections in the 21st century. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
2.
AbramowitzAlanWebsterSteven. 2016. The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. elections in the 21st century. Electoral Studies41:12–22.
3.
BafumiJ.HerronMichael C.. 2010. Leapfrog representation and extremism: A study of American voters and their members in congress. American Political Science Review104:519–42.
4.
BaloghBrian. 2009. A government out of sight: The mystery of national authority in nineteenth century America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BalzDan. 2014. National Governors Association showing deep Republican, Democratic divisions. The Washington Post, 225, p. A1.
BaumerDonald C.GoldHoward J.. 2010. Parties, polarization, and democracy in the United States. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.
8.
BeerSamuel H.1976. The adoption of general revenue sharing: A case study of public sector politics. Public Policy24:127–95.
9.
BeerSamuel H.1978. Federalism, nationalism, and democracy in America. The American Political Science Review72:9–21.
10.
BinderSarah A.2003. Stalemate: Causes and consequences of legislative gridlock. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
11.
BirchAnthony H.1984. Overload, ungovernability and delegitimation: The theories and the British case. British Journal of Poltical Science14:135–60.
12.
BowmanAnn O’ M.KrauseGeorge A.. 2003. Power shift: Measuring policy centralization in U.S. intergovernmental relations, 1947-1998. American Politics Research31:301–24.
13.
CammissaAnne. 1995. Intergovernmental lobbying: State and local governments in the federal arena. Westport, CT: Praeger.
14.
ChoWendy K. TamGimpelJames G.HuiIris S.2012. Voter migration and the geographic sorting of the American electorate. Annals of the Association of American Geographers103:856–70.
15.
Congressional Budget Office. 2011. Estimated impact of the American recovery and reinvestment act on employment and economic output from January 2011 through March 2011. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office.
16.
ConlanTimothy J.2016. From new federalism to devolution: Twenty five years of intergovernmental Reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution press.
17.
ConlanTimothy J.PosnerPaul L.ReganPriscilla M.. 2016. Governing under stress: The implementation of Obama’s economic stimiulus program. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
18.
CotterCornelius P.HennesseyBernard. 1964. Politics without power: The national party committees. New York: Atherton.
19.
DerthickMartha. 1975. Uncontrollable spending for social service grants. Washington, DC: Brookings Instiution.
20.
DerthickMartha. 2001. Keeping the compound republic: Essays on American federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
21.
DiIulioJohn. 2014. Bring back the bureaucrats. West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Press.
22.
FehrmanCraig. 2016. All politics is national: How state politicians went from solving the problems in their own backyards to mimicking the gridlock in Washington. Fivethirtyeight.com. November 7. www.fivethirtyeight.com/features/all-politics-is-national(accessed May 27, 2017).
23.
FreeLloydCantrilHadley. 1967. The political beliefs of Americans. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
24.
GelmanAndrew. 2008. Red state, blue state, rich state, poor state: Why Americans vote the way they do. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25.
GrodzinsMorton. 1966. The American system. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
26.
GrodzinsMorton. 1967. American political parties and the American system. In American federalism in perspective, ed. WildavskyAaron, 109–43. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
27.
GrodzinsMorton. 1968. Centralization and decentralization in the American federal system. In A nation of states, ed. GoldwinRobert, 1–23. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
28.
HaiderDonald. 1974. When Governments Come to Washington. New York: Free Press.
29.
HerrnsonPaul. 2010. The evolution of national party organizations. In The Oxford handbook of American political parties and interest groups, eds. Sandy MaiselL.BerryJeffrey, 331–55. New York: Oxford University Press.
30.
HersheyMarjorie R.2011. Party politics in America, 14th ed. New York: Longman.
31.
Hertel-FernandezAlexanderSkocpolTheda. 2016. How the right trounced liberals in the states. Democracy: A Journal of Ideas39:46–59.
32.
HoogheLiesbetMarksGarySchakelArjan H.2010. The rise of regional authority: A comparative study of 42 democracies. London, UK: Routledge.
KincaidJohn. 1990. From cooperative to coercive federalism. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science509:139–52.
43.
KincaidJohnColeRichard L.2011. Citizen attitudes toward issues of federalism in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Publius: The Journal of Federalism41:53–75.
LightPaul C.1999. The true size of government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
46.
MannThomas E.OrnsteinNorman J.2016. It’s even worse than it was: How the American constitutional system collided with the new politics of extremism. New York: Basic Books.
47.
MayhewDavid. 1974. Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
48.
McCannPamela J. C.2016. The federal design dilemma: Congress and intergovernmental delegation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
MettlerSuzanne. 2011. The submerged state: How invisible government policies undermine American democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
51.
MillerEdward AlanBlandingDavid. 2012. Pressure cooker politics: Partisanship and symbolism in state certification of federal stimulus funds. State Politics and Policy Quarterly12:58–74.
52.
MorganKimberly J.CampbellAndrea Louise. 2012. The delegated welfare state: Medicare, markets and the governance of social policy. New York: Oxford University Press.
53.
Nicholson-CrottySean. 2012. Leaving money on the table: Learning from recent refusals of federal grants in the American states. Publius: The Journal of Federalism42:449–66.
54.
Nicholson-CrottySean. 2015. Governors, grants, and elections: A political theory of fiscal federalism. New York: Johns Hopkins University Press.
55.
NugentJohn D.2009. Safeguarding federalism: How states protect their interests in national policymaking. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
56.
O’NeillThomas P.1988. Man of the house: The life and political memoirs of speaker tip O’Neill. New York: St Martins.
57.
Pew Research Center. 2014a. Political polarization and media habits. October. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
58.
Pew Research Center. 2014b. Political polarization in the American public. June. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
59.
Pew Research Center. 2015. Beyond distrust: How Americans view their government. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
60.
PosnerPaul L.1998. The politics of unfunded mandates. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
61.
PosnerPaul L.2008. Mandates: The politics of coercive federalism. In Intergovernmental management for the 21st century, eds. ConlanTimothy J.PosnerPaul L., 286–309. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
62.
RikerWilliam H.1964. Federalism: Origin, operation, significance. Boston, MA: Little Brown.
63.
RobertsonDavid B.2011. Federalism and the making of America. New York: Routledge.
64.
ScheppachRaymond. 2012. Interview by Timothy Conlan. Former Executive Director, January 16. Washington, DC: National Governors Association.
65.
SmithTroy E.2008. Intergovernmental lobbying: How opportunistic actors create a less structured and balanced federal system. In Intergovernmental management for the 21st century, eds. ConlanTimothy J.PosnerPaul L., 310–37. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
66.
TrumanDavid. 1967. Federalism and the party system. In American federalism in perspective, ed. WildavskyAaron, 81–108. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
67.
TrumanDavid. 1984–1985. Party reform, party atrophy, and constitutional change. Political Science Quarterly99:640–47.
U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1980. The federal role in the federal system: The dynamics of growth A-77. Washington, DC: U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
70.
U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1984. Regulatory federalism: Policy, process, impact, and reform A-95. Washington, DC: U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
71.
U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1986. The transformation in American politics: Implications for federalism A-106. Washington, DC: U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
WalkerDavid B.1995. The rebirth of federalism: Slouching toward Washington. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
74.
WekkinGary D.HowardJoseph Y.. 2015. United States of America: Nationalized politics and centralized federalism. In Political parties and civil society in federal countries, eds. DetterbeckKlausRenzschWolfgangKincaidJohn, 279–309. New York: Oxford University Press.
