Interregional Competition and Federal Cooperation


Book Description

Competition among governments at the same level or with similar responsibilities is commonly referred to as the horizontal competition or inter-jurisdictional competition in the literature on economics and political science. A related concept of intergovernmental or vertical competition refers to competition among governments with different levels and types of responsibilities e.g. among federal, state and local governments.Our concern in this paper is with the inter-jurisdictional competition (interregional or local-local competition) alone and its implications for the federal government's role in securing an economic union or an internal common market. Competition among state and local governments is quite commonplace in most federal systems. It occurs through lobbying for employment generating and against hazardous waste location of federal or private sector projects including military bases, encouragement of foreign and domestic investment, providing incentives and subsidies for attracting capital and labor, providing public infrastructure to facilitate business location, providing a differentiated menu of local public services, one-stop windows for licensing and registration and endless other ways of demonstrating an open door policy for new capital and skilled workforce. State and local governments also compete among themselves in erecting barriers to trade and tariff walls to protect local industry and business. They also try to out-compete among themselves in exporting tax burdens to non-residents where feasible. This paper examines the pros and cons of inter-jurisdictional competition in a federal system and examines the ways the federal government can play a supporting role to accentuate the positive aspects of this competition while dealing with any negative fallout of unbridled competition.




Foreign Affairs Federalism


Book Description

Challenging the myth that the federal government exercises exclusive control over U.S. foreign-policymaking, Michael J. Glennon and Robert D. Sloane propose that we recognize the prominent role that states and cities now play in that realm. Foreign Affairs Federalism provides the first comprehensive study of the constitutional law and practice of federalism in the conduct of U.S. foreign relations. It could hardly be timelier. States and cities recently have limited greenhouse gas emissions, declared nuclear free zones and sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants, established thousands of sister-city relationships, set up informal diplomatic offices abroad, and sanctioned oppressive foreign governments. Exploring the implications of these and other initiatives, this book argues that the national interest cannot be advanced internationally by Washington alone. Glennon and Sloane examine in detail the considerable foreign affairs powers retained by the states under the Constitution and question the need for Congress or the president to step in to provide "one voice" in foreign affairs. They present concrete, realistic ways that the courts can update antiquated federalism precepts and untangle interwoven strands of international law, federal law, and state law. The result is a lucid, incisive, and up-to-date analysis of the rules that empower-and limit-states and cities abroad.







Federalist Government in Principle and Practice


Book Description

Federalism has generally been characterized as a system of government that is friendly to liberty. It is not obvious, though, why this should be so. Federalism is a form of government where citizens simultaneously reside in at least two governments, each of which has independent authority to tax and to regulate. By contrast, in a unitary form of government citizens face only one government with independent authority to tax and regulate. At first glance, it would seem a bit strange to claim that liberty is more secure when citizens are members of two governments with independent authority than when they are members of only one such government. The relationship between federalism and liberty turns out to be a complex one, and one that is capable of working in either direction. Whether federalism supports or erodes liberty depends on importantly on the institutional framework within which federalist governance takes place. The essays in Federalist Government in Principle and Practice examine this institutionalist theme from both theoretical and practical perspectives.




The Politics Industry


Book Description

Leading political innovation activist Katherine Gehl and world-renowned business strategist Michael Porter bring fresh perspective, deep scholarship, and a real and actionable solution, Final Five Voting, to the grand challenge of our broken political and democratic system. Final Five Voting has already been adopted in Alaska and is being advanced in states across the country. The truth is, the American political system is working exactly how it is designed to work, and it isn't designed or optimized today to work for us—for ordinary citizens. Most people believe that our political system is a public institution with high-minded principles and impartial rules derived from the Constitution. In reality, it has become a private industry dominated by a textbook duopoly—the Democrats and the Republicans—and plagued and perverted by unhealthy competition between the players. Tragically, it has therefore become incapable of delivering solutions to America's key economic and social challenges. In fact, there's virtually no connection between our political leaders solving problems and getting reelected. In The Politics Industry, business leader and path-breaking political innovator Katherine Gehl and world-renowned business strategist Michael Porter take a radical new approach. They ingeniously apply the tools of business analysis—and Porter's distinctive Five Forces framework—to show how the political system functions just as every other competitive industry does, and how the duopoly has led to the devastating outcomes we see today. Using this competition lens, Gehl and Porter identify the most powerful lever for change—a strategy comprised of a clear set of choices in two key areas: how our elections work and how we make our laws. Their bracing assessment and practical recommendations cut through the endless debate about various proposed fixes, such as term limits and campaign finance reform. The result: true political innovation. The Politics Industry is an original and completely nonpartisan guide that will open your eyes to the true dynamics and profound challenges of the American political system and provide real solutions for reshaping the system for the benefit of all. THE INSTITUTE FOR POLITICAL INNOVATION The authors will donate all royalties from the sale of this book to the Institute for Political Innovation.




Strategic Interaction Among County Governments in the Choice of Local Economic Development Programs and Public Services


Book Description

This study investigates strategic interaction among county governments in local economic development and in the provision of public services. Decentralization of welfare has given counties the added responsibility of providing income and jobs for residents. Localization of economic development and decentralization of welfare programs may intensify intergovernmental competition among local governments. County governments in the United States may act strategically by setting lower welfare benefit levels, and by offering business incentives to new firms, thus resulting in the possible under-provision of local public services. Key objectives of this study are to implement an empirical model for measuring whether localization of economic development activities and devolution of welfare program administration leads to heightened aggressiveness of the economic development activities of county governments. Also, the study investigates whether redistributive services provided by county governments are influenced by interjurisdictional competition and other attributes of counties. County-level data from 46 states in the United States are used in the analyses. Spatial econometric models are used to test the hypothesis that county governments choose economic development activities interdependently. The hypothesis that devolution of welfare leads to heightened interjurisdictional competition for economic development and a race to the bottom in the provision of local public services is also tested. The empirical analysis reveals that localization of economic development activities and devolution of welfare programs lead to heightened aggressiveness in the economic development activities of county governments. Economic development activities in one community affect the economic development activities in neighboring communities. Although there are spatial interactions between county governments in their economic development activities, devolution of welfare programs does not lead to increased aggressiveness in economic development. The results indicate that the presence of an economic development professional on staff and the existence of an industrial park lead to increased aggressiveness in economic development activities of county governments. The analysis does not show evidence of a race to the bottom in the provision of local public services.







How Does Competition Foster Diffusion of Innovation of Economic Development Programs in the Southwest Region


Book Description

This dissertation explores how competition fosters diffusion of innovation among the states of the southwest region. The researcher believes that in an effort to remain competitive in economic development with neighboring states, states and their local governments mimic each other's successful programs. In so doing, they disseminate program innovation. The study looks at eight economic development program innovations among the southwest states of Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico. It employs a case study approach and data are collected from the following sources: legislative review, the laws that set up the programs, and interviews of economic development executives. The study reveals that diffusion of innovation occurs because of competition in economic development. This competition is aided by regional influences and the internal determinants of each state. The process by which these innovations spread is through formal and informal interactions among policy makers and economic development specialists in the states.




Comparative Federalism in the Devolution Era


Book Description

The decline of statism as the world's dominant ideology has ignited a fierce debate over the evolving shape and power of federalism in global society. The popular demand for devolution has shifted the locus of power from national government to smaller regional units and heralded the reconceptualization of international law away from the idea of sovereignty, toward one of jurisdiction. This timely set of essays studies the impact wrought by these centrifugal forces across Europe, Africa, and the Americas, and analyzes the latest movements for constitutional change, self-determination, and separation. Comparative Federalism in the Devolution Era offers political scientists and legal scholars a new perspective on the diverse nature and exercise of postmodern federalism, and the continuing struggle between differing views of the national-local relationship.