Today there is the great discussion about the spheres and peculiarities of realizing the principles of the federal and local control. Historians and sociologists concentrate on the necessity of making the federal government more powerful or on the possibility to provide more rights and opportunities to the states.
Thus, the question is rather controversial, and it is necessary to examine its main aspects properly in order to provide the credible answer to it. It is important to determine the areas in which the realization of federal laws is significant and in which the decisions of the local authorities are more effective.
In the 21st century, Washington can get the greater power in order to dictate national policy. However, the questions of the national policy should be clearly indicated, and they should include the issues of the military sphere, address the national interests at the global arena, and regulate the aspects of the international relations.
In this case, the national policy will be realized with references to the national interests in the context of the world. Thus, the features of the strong central government should also be associated only with those aspects which are important for the whole nation and on which its successful development depends. The federal government has no much impact in the spheres of the education, commerce, and criminal law.
The local authorities regulate these fields. Thus, Cropf states that “the states and the federal government are considered supreme in their own sphere of power, although there is considerable overlap” (Cropf, 2008, p. 106). To achieve the most effective results in providing successful federal and local policies, it is necessary to regulate this overlap in order to avoid the negative effects of the process.
Thus, it is important to give more powers to the federal government for controlling the states, but without much limiting the opportunities of the local authorities. To meet the social requirements, the necessary balance of powers should be found. From this point, the federal government should not override all the state policies, but only those ones which do not address the constitutional principles.
The state policies should be connected with the federal or national policies and be improved or adapted by the local authorities in order to meet the interests of the citizens of the state. Cropf indicates that “the federal system uses the states to rein in the power of central government, and vice versa” (Cropf, 2008, p. 106).
The federal government should also have the right to control the adequacy and examine the necessity of this or that decision adopted by the local authorities.
It is possible to say that modern state and local governments have the powers and ways to address the definite concerns and issues influenced by realizing the aspects of the national policy (Stillman, 2009).
Nevertheless, the local authorities’ strategies are developed only in relation to solving the definite issues connected with the specific problems of this or that state. That is why the federal government should control the realization of the main national programs and rules also at the local level, but without limiting the state powers in solving the other questions.
Thus, there is no necessity to provide the greater powers to Washington with amending the Constitution. The necessary balance between the state and federal powers is already fixed in the US national documents and in the Constitution. That is why to provide the effective policies, it is important to follow the fixed norms strictly.
References
Cropf, R. (2008). American public administration: Public service for the 21st century. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Stillman, R. (2009). Public administration: Concepts and cases. USA: Wadsworth Publishing.