Week 1 Assignment: Theories of Federalism

Week 1 Assignment: Theories of Federalism

Week 1 Assignment: Theories of Federalism

Theories of Federalism

Intergovernmental systems possess both extensive horizontal articulation and vertical interdependence. That is because intergovernmental relations exist both by collaborative and hierarchical arrangement combination, thus proving the little consensus within a singular intergovernmental relation model in the US. As a result, Deil Wright is known for his provision of three intergovernmental relations models that are essential in understanding and assessing intergovernmental relations. For Deil Wright, the three intergovernmental relations models elaborate more on the relationship between national, state, and local governments through overlapping, inclusive and coordinated authority.^[1] Hence, the paper will evaluate the federalism theories in light of Wright’s intergovernmental relationship.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE Week 1 Assignment: Theories of Federalism HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

Of all the three models, the most embraced model is the overlapping authority model that would help to depict these relationships. The model is essential since it gives a conceptual basis for moving beyond the views of intergovernmental relations. However, it is important to understand that each of the three models, overlapping, inclusive and coordinated authority tends to represent the possible relationship types those governmental institutions exhibit.^[2] The coordinate authority model implies that state, local and national governments are autonomous and independent, while the inclusive authority model accentuates that the state, local and national governments support the hierarchical relationships at all governmental levels. The inclusive authority model works on the premise that national governments head the local and state governments through hierarchical network arrangement, making states more administrative districts for the established federal policies.^[3] Lastly, the overlapping authority acts as a configuration of the three governmental levels. That means the substantial operation areas must simultaneously involve the state, local and national governments. The autonomous areas for all government levels are comparatively small, and the influence and power available are relatively small. When elaborating further on overlapping authority, Wright indicates that an overlapping authority is created by engaging in substantial bargaining and negotiation, requiring federalism to have different scales of government that cooperates.^[4] Such cooperative federalism has led to engaging in governmental activities without a guiding star, compass, or chart since the cooperation has long been uncorrelated and unplanned with various governmental activities, even those within similar fields. There exists different confusion on what cooperative federalism entails. For instance, the main role of any government is to ensure that it punishes evildoers, as explained in Romans 13:4. Though religious-wise, it is only God that has the power to punish evildoers.^[5]

However, when one integrates the religious view into political theory, the government’s role is to ensure that they punish all evildoers, thus avenging the country’s citizens that had been offended by them. For instance, when the government punishes offenders that prove greediness in pursuing private properties and put other individuals’ lives and health at risk, such government is trying to protect the citizens, which is characterized more as a negative role. On the other hand, governments can also play positive roles by providing food stamps, healthcare, or other factors like providing students with low-interest loans. Such a positive role is supported by Roman 13:3, which says that it is essential to do the right thing, which will help receive praise for such actions.[6] Hence, the state, local and national governments do not have to engage in creating positive activities solely, but instead, they need to provide recognition to those that do good, like humanitarian groups. Contrary, cooperation has different coordination means on how states and the federal government use their resources to ensure that the federal government has smooth transactions of a business. Hence, how power is articulated between these government levels depends more on the transaction context.^[7] An example concerns constitutional law matters, which precede policies that begin at the local level. At the same time, in some areas, the state governments are more independent when articulating their authority and do not need to depend on the federal governments, especially in cases like marriage rights determination or settling land disputes. Apart from such differences, one will find that the federal government takes over the local and states affairs in other areas.

When explaining how the intergovernmental systems work, it is necessary to consider how Jesus viewed the political pathway. For instance, in Matthew 22:20-22, Jesus emphasized the need for people to acknowledge that despite the Kingdom not being his world, it was necessary to ensure that Caesar’s place was also acknowledged, proving the limited government’s role.^[8] Such factors explain why some nations that have not yet found their democratic systems still struggle with engaging in cooperative federalism. As a result, a nation like the United States came up with a constitution that limits what the government can do to the systems. As a result, the United States citizens, through the constitution, have to abide by the laws and regulations of the land and cease injustices, exclusion, and coercive systems.^[9] That can clearly explain how the intergovernmental systems work on public education matters. That is because some states agree to add property taxes since educating the youth is a collaborative effort between the state, local and federal governments.^[10] Hence, whenever the local public schools elect their board members, the federal government’s power becomes limited since the board will oversee how these schools execute funds. Hence, the only option remaining is for the federal government to induce different policies for compliance purposes. Conclusively, the power distribution within intergovernmental relations has, over the years, been established as political reform subject. As a result, the aspect of devolution has been seen as the main solution since it enables the different levels to coordinate easily with each other. Hence, it becomes easy for intergovernmental levels to acknowledge their governance limits, thus putting them in a position where they can easily make informed decisions.

Bibliography

Burke, Brendan F., and Jeffrey L. Brudney. “Why We Fight: Conflict and “Coping” in Twenty-First-Century Intergovernmental Relations.” In Intergovernmental relations in transition, pp. 58-74. Routledge, 2018.

Bowen, William R. “Progressives, the COVID Pandemic, and the Laboratories of Democracy: Is the Left Saying “Goodbye” to Cooperative Federalism?.” (2021).

Daniel, J. Elazar. Covenant and civil society: the constitutional matrix of modern democracy. Routledge, 2018.

Elazar, Daniel Judah. “Federalism: an overview.” (1995).

Lo, Jane C., and Carol I. Adams. “Civic literacy through literacy instruction: Using structured academic controversy in a government classroom.” Citizenship Teaching & Learning 13, no. 1 (2018): 83-104.

O’Toole, Laurence J., and Robert K. Christensen. American intergovernmental relations: Foundations, perspectives, and issues. Cq Press, 2012.

[1]Burke, Brendan F., and Jeffrey L. Brudney. “Why We Fight: Conflict and “Coping” in Twenty-First-Century Intergovernmental Relations.” In Intergovernmental relations in transition, pp. 58-74. Routledge, 2018.

[2] O’Toole, Laurence J., and Robert K. Christensen. American intergovernmental relations: Foundations, perspectives, and issues. Cq Press, 2012.

[3] Daniel, J. Elazar. Covenant and civil society: the constitutional matrix of modern democracy. Routledge, 2018.

[4] Lo, Jane C., and Carol I. Adams. “Civic literacy through literacy instruction: Using structured academic controversy in a government classroom.” Citizenship Teaching & Learning 13, no. 1 (2018): 83-104.

[5] Bowen, William R. “Progressives, the COVID Pandemic, and the Laboratories of Democracy: Is the Left Saying “Goodbye” to Cooperative Federalism?.” (2021).

[6] Bowen, William R. “Progressives, the COVID Pandemic, and the Laboratories of Democracy: Is the Left Saying “Goodbye” to Cooperative Federalism?.” (2021).

[7] Elazar, Daniel Judah. “Federalism: an overview.” (1995).

[8] Bowen, William R. “Progressives, the COVID Pandemic, and the Laboratories of Democracy: Is the Left Saying “Goodbye” to Cooperative Federalism?.” (2021).

[9] Daniel, J. Elazar. Covenant and civil society: the constitutional matrix of modern democracy. Routledge, 2018.

[10] Lo, Jane C., and Carol I. Adams. “Civic literacy through literacy instruction: Using structured academic controversy in a government classroom.” Citizenship Teaching & Learning 13, no. 1 (2018): 83-104.

Grading Rubric
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
Thread	40 to >37.0 pts Advanced Thread is best characterized by the following: • Comprehension: Prompt questions are fully addressed • Presentation: Concise, clear, and logical • Competency: Demonstrates a mastery of the required materials with at least 4 citations from those materials in Turabian Author-Date style • Thoughtful: Skillfully challenges assumptions and conclusions; uses comparison • Worldview: Bible verse(s) used to evaluate theories and the claims of authors 37 to >34.0 pts Proficient Thread is best characterized by the following: • Comprehension: Prompt questions are partially addressed • Presentation: Mostly concise, clear, and logical • Competency: Demonstrates understanding of the required materials with at least 3 citations from those materials in Turabian Author-Date style • Thoughtful: Provides adequate challenges to assumptions and conclusions; uses comparison • Worldview: Bible verse(s) integrated into the essay 34 to >0.0 pts Developing Thread is best characterized by the following: • Comprehension: Prompt questions are unclearly addressed or missing • Presentation: Lacks clarity and is often confusing • Competency: Little understanding of the required materials with 1 or 2 citations from those materials in Turabian Author-Date style • Thoughtful: rarely challenges assumptions and conclusions; rarely uses comparison • Worldview: Bible verse(s) present, but not integrated into the discussion. 0 pts Not Present	40 pts
Replies	30 to >28.0 pts Advanced Replies are best characterized by the following: • Presentation: Concise, clear, and logical • Competency: Demonstrates a mastery of the required materials with at least 2 citations from those materials in each reply in Turabian Author-Date style • Responsive: Focuses on a point other student made about one of the prompt questions • Contribution: Unique, and advances knowledge about the prompt question(s) • Argument: Skillfully demonstrates both agreement and disagreement with other student’s position. Uses Bible and/or course materials to support position • Thoughtful: Skillfully challenges assumptions and conclusions; uses comparison 28 to >25.0 pts Proficient Replies are best characterized by the following: • Presentation: Mostly concise, clear, and logical • Competency: Demonstrates an understanding of the required materials with at least 1 citation from those materials in each reply in Turabian Author-Date style • Responsive: Focuses mostly on a point other student made about one of the prompt questions • Contribution: Minimum repetition, and adds to knowledge about the prompt question(s) • Argument: Demonstrates both agreement and disagreement with other student’s position. Uses Bible and/or course materials to support position • Thoughtful: Adequately challenges assumptions and conclusions; uses comparison 25 to >0.0 pts Developing Replies are best characterized by the following: • Presentation: Lacks clarity and is often confusing • Competency: Demonstrates little understanding of the required materials with 1 citation from those materials in each reply in Turabian Author-Date style • Responsive: Has little to do with a point the other student made or the prompt question(s) • Contribution: Often repetitive and unfocused on the prompt question(s) • Argument: Either fully agrees or fully disagrees with other student’s position. Provides little to no support for position • Thoughtful: Rarely challenges assumptions and conclusions; rarely uses comparison 0 pts Not Present	30 pts
Grammar/Spelling/Turabian	15 to >14.0 pts Advanced Between 0-5 errors (spelling, grammar, and Turabian Author-Date style) 14 to >13.0 pts Proficient Between 6-10 errors (spelling, grammar, and Turabian Author-Date style) 13 to >0.0 pts Developing Between 11-15 errors (spelling, grammar, and Turabian Author-Date style) 0 pts Not Present	15 pts
Thread: Word Count	15 to >14.0 pts Advanced The thread is 1,000–1,250 words; each reply is between 350-500 words 14 to >13.0 pts Proficient The thread is 750–999 words. OR 1,251–1,500 words; each reply is 300-349 words OR 501-550 words 13 to >0.0 pts Developing The thread is less than 750 words OR more than 1,500 words; each reply is less than 300 words OR more than 550 words 0 pts Not Present	15 pts
Total Points: 100

Week 1 Sec 5 Theories of Federalism Paper Request

What theory of federalism (or, if using Wright’s classification system, the IGR model) best represents the American intergovernmental system? Give at least 3 reasons to support your claim and contrast your choice with at least 2 other models/theories. Conclude by identifying which theory/model best informs your research topic and question.

In the field of federalism and intergovernmental relations, the Christian statesman should reason
and make decisions about policy according to the Bible, Christian morality, and the founding
constitutional principles of limited government. This is done in the context where ideas and
practices may or may not align with Christian beliefs. Toward that end, the Discussion’s purpose
is to introduce those theories and models that are most persuasive in federalism studies. To aid in
that goal, the Discussion Assignment focuses on taking a position (the “thesis”) with respect to
the assigned question (the “prompt”) and defending that position.
INSTRUCTIONS

• For the one thread–Compose a 1000-1250-word essay that cogently addresses and
answers the prompt. Provide at least four citations from the required course materials and one reference to Scripture.

GUIDELINES
Consider the thread and replies as professional communications by the Christian statesman. As
such, they should demonstrate
– a mastery of the required course materials.
– substantive and well-reasoned arguments, not merely opinions. Support claims with
evidence from areas such as logic, the Bible, course materials, personal experience, and
the framers’ views on federalism.
-care in the proper citation and referencing of sources according to Turabian Author-Date
style.

Required Reading:
1. O’Toole, Lawrence, & Christensen: Chapters 1-2
2. Elazar: Preface
3. Elazar; Chapter 1-2