Professional Documents
Culture Documents
the national government and the states, and in which both of them have the authority to
enact laws or public policies. The Constitution grants some powers only for the federal
government (the enumerated powers), some other ones just for the state governments (the
reserved powers), and lets both executives share some other powers (the concurrent
powers). Since the early history of the US, it has been argued to what extent should both
of these government levels have power at the expense of the other. I am now pointing the
arguments of both of these positions, and my personal opinion regarding which of these
levels of government should take charge of which kind of policies and why.
In the first place, I think that commerce, environmental and defense policies should be
held by the federal government, as it concerns equally to all the states, and also because
security forces and taxes among the different states would be in this way coordinated,
which would make the implementation of these three policies much easier and more
efficient.
On the other hand, I reckon that those policies that involve more of a citizen-government
close relation, such as the budgetary policy, could be conducted more efficiently by the
state governments than by the federal one, as this executive knows first hand the needs
and claims of its citizens, which may also vary from state to state.
Nevertheless, there are some kinds of policies that could fit in both of these categories,
whether because they affect to all national citizens or since more specific public demands
could be served for each state. One of them is the education policy.
At present, education is primarily a state responsibility in the US. It is not among the
federal government liabilities since, despite recognized as a key element of the society’s
well-being, education “is not among the rights afforded explicit protection under our
Federal Constitution," as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1973. Nonetheless, I would not
lose sight of the educational policies and their actual execution in the different states if I
were the federal government, as it is really important to verify whether the states are
"equitably" or "adequately" providing public education. At the end of the day, the students
of today will be the workers of tomorrow, and quality education is proven to be related
to economic growth.
What is more, there are examples of other federal or decentralized states which have had
or currently have serious problems with the difference of quality and standards of the
education provided in its different regions or states. A clear example is Spain and its
autonomous regions. Since I come from Spain and have experienced this in very much
person, I know that delegating the education policy may result in major political and civil
conflicts, so I would definitely opt for letting the federal government address it.
Another controversial topic to think about is whether the states or the federal government
should have the last word when talking about gun control policy. In this case, it makes
sense to me that there exist state laws for this topic, as it also does for the alcohol legal
age. As I see it, culture and customs vary from state to state, and alcohol and guns may
be less dangerous in some states than in the other ones. So, for me, it is perfectly
understandable that this “little things” that for sure do not affect the wellness of the overall
population, are ruled by the states and not by the federal government.
By contrast, immigration policy is for me one of the ones that should clearly belong to
than the national ones, and controlling immigration is specially important for security
reasons.
To sum up, I could say that decentralizing is a truly helpful strategy to handle a country’s
policymaking, particularly when talking about the US, the third largest country in the
world; but it is something that for sure can not be taken lightly. A central government can
policies, and also lets more resources available for the central government main activities.
Even so, decentralized decisions may be less open and transparent, and sometimes the
So maybe states are better positioned to take the lead in making policy when they have
the adequate amount of resources and skilled personnel to do it, and sure enough the
federal government should lead the way when it came to legislating on cross-boundary
public problems. What is clear is that there is no simple answer to which level of
government should take responsibility for which kind of policy making, but that is one of
the reasons which make policy design and analysis so challenging and interesting.