Dubnick, Melvin J., and Alan R. Gitelson. “Testimony of Melvin J. Dubnick, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Kansas; and Alan R. Gitelson, Associate Professor of Political Science, Loyola University of Chicago.” In State Implementation of Federal Standards: Part 1, The Clean Air Act, 3–10. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, 97th Cong., 1st sess., July 22, 1981. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1982.
AI-Generated Summary:
The document discusses the evolving role of federal, state, and local governments in intergovernmental regulation, especially through legal mechanisms.
Federal and State Intergovernmental Relations
- Historically, intergovernmental relations aimed to enhance local government policy capacity through grants and administrative conditions.
- Since the 1960s, there has been a shift where subnational units are viewed as delivery mechanisms for federal policies.
- Federal influence now often involves coercive techniques like preemption and legal conscription to enforce national standards.
- These changes challenge traditional federalism and may reduce the legitimacy of state and local authority.
Techniques of Federal Regulation in Intergovernmental System
- Federal regulation occurs through direct orders, crosscutting requirements, fiscal sanctions, and partial preemption.
- Direct orders are usually judicial and based on constitutional grounds, such as the 14th Amendment.
- Crosscutting requirements attach to grants-in-aid, mandating compliance with federal policies for funding.
- Fiscal sanctions threaten to withhold funding if states do not meet federal standards, exemplified by the Clean Air Act.
- Partial preemption involves federal standards that force states to enforce specific policies, often linked to interstate commerce.
Legal Conscription and Its Implications
- Legal conscription compels states to implement federal policies by threatening federal intervention if they do not comply.
- Major laws like the Clean Air Act and Water Pollution Control Act use this approach to enforce national standards.
- Despite its power, legal conscription has limited practical use and has not been tested in courts.
- It remains a potential tool for federal government to nationalize regulatory policies but is rarely employed.
Political and Administrative Challenges of Intergovernmental Regulation
- Federal regulation often involves complex political issues, including local fiscal burdens and authority legitimacy.
- Local governments may resist federal mandates that impose financial or administrative burdens.
- Federal regulations can be used by local entities to delay or counteract other federal policies.
- The effectiveness of intergovernmental regulation depends on political will, regional differences, and legal frameworks.
Circumstances for Appropriate Use of Federal Regulation Techniques
- Federal regulation is most appropriate when high technical expertise and consensus exist, such as weights and measures.
- It is suitable in areas with clear cause-effect relationships and high technical legitimacy.
- Preemption and legal conscription are justified when federal standards are essential for national policy goals.
- The choice of technique depends on the specific policy area, political context, and regional considerations.