Literature Review
Literature Review Assignment #2 for Week/Module Five
Your Name
Professor’s Name
Liberty University
PLCY 804-Your Section #-Term (like “Fall 2021”)
Date Assignment is Due Here
2
Literature Review
Introduction
Elazar's model of federalism is similar to other models in that it describes how the national
and state government relate to each other as separate authorities. Where it differs from other
models is that it focuses on the dominant culture in each state. Elazar’s model of federalism is a
dualistic model. Elazar’s model focuses on the cultural values of each society and how those values
based on beliefs and practices impact the structure of federal systems of government. It emphasizes
the “dual federalism” where the central govt is supreme in national matters while state govts are
supreme in local matters. In contrast to other models, this one is more focused on linking political
structure with culture. Most other scholars focus on state sovereignty as the central feature of their
models rather than state-federal relations. For example, some scholars model federal systems as a
combination of a strong central government with strong state governments (Griffith), or strong
central government with weak states (Richardson), or a weak central government with strong
subnational governments (Lowery). Other scholars tie their models to historical periods rather than
state-federal relations, such as Levy and Engeman’s model tying their four types of federal systems
to the French Revolution (Levy and Engeman).
In the first literature review assignment, I provided a theoretical framework for exploring
the research question; How does Elazar’s model of federalism compare to other leading models.”
In this assignment, I will discuss the key findings of different authors based on their models which
are comparable to Elazar’s model of Federalism. Further, the research will involve comparing
3
Elazar’s model to two of the most comparable model rivals to determine their similarities and
differences.
Findings from the Analysis
Elazar argues that the true definition of Federalism focuses on two aspects: it accentuates
the role of the national government while recognizing that some areas of policy-making are
reserved for the states; it also stresses that as a ‘crisscross movement,’ Federalism seeks to balance
state and national interest through a power-sharing arrangement. Elazar's model of federalism
divides the United States into three categories: moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic. In
general, he locates states that separate church and state in the moralistic category, states that place
a high value on individual rights and liberties in the individualistic category, and states whose
politics are highly tradition-bound in the traditionalistic category (Boudreault, 2020). There are
four main components to Elazar's approach: first, recognizing that each form of government
(national, state, and local) has three basic governmental functions - allocation, representation, and
mediation; second, classification of each function according to its dominant characteristic
(allocation can be rotation or competition; representation can be clientage or trusteeship; mediation
can be instrumental or diffusional); third, recognition of three forms of government (moralistic,
individualistic and traditional) based on the type of dominant cultural value that sustains it; and
fourth, incorporation of these different forms into traditional American political culture which
encourages acceptance of all three types as legitimate (Stevenson, 2019). In this model, federal
systems that have clear and distinct regional identities at the top-level perpetuate regionalism by
reproducing regional patterns in lower levels of government. A moralistic political culture
associates power with goodness. Given the moral certainty that pervades this type of political
4
culture, strong central institutions are required to reconcile disputes that arise within it. Such a
system is distributive because it has a large number of interacting jurisdictions that are equally
powerful or equally powerless. Consociational features often may be identified in such a system.
One of the theories or the models comparable to that of Elazar is cooperative federalism.
Cooperative federalism is not an entirely new model, but an evolution from dual federalism. It
emphasizes a partnership between the levels of government and their relative responsibilities for
shared goals rather than separate responsibilities for separate functions. In many ways, the two
models of federalism are quite similar (Young, 2018). While critics of cooperative federalism
may point to it being a more ambiguous and confusing model than the separation of powers system
preferred by Elazar, some would argue that in terms of the evolution of state and federal
relationships, that is precisely the point (Young, 2018). Cooperative federalism represents the
changing pattern of relationships between states and the federal government; changes like those
brought about by increased intervention during the New Deal and Great Society eras. Both Elazar
and cooperative federalism involve the relationship between the state government and the federal
government. There are key differences in the way that they view this relationship. Elazar's model
identifies how the culture of a city or state can determine how they relate to the federal government
and how power is distributed over time (Young, 2018). Cooperative federalism is an actual model
that has been ascribed to since the New Deal days, where support from both levels of government
was seen as necessary for a sound economy.
The other comparable model is Nation-centered federalism which is defined as a theory or
study of political power that is divided between several levels of government, where the national
and state governments share sovereign power. Bedi (2020) argues that Nation-centered federalism
has been the norm of modern times. According to this understanding, nation-states are sovereign
5
entities that conduct their own affairs internally and enjoy the right to a full degree of independence
in the world Bedi (2020). They recognize no authority above them except those they themselves
have voluntarily created. Guillén (2019) shares a similar opinion by noting that states are held
together not by any external force but rather by a shared identity, a common ground of historical
experience, language, or culture. Nation-centered federalism also requires national institutions like
an army, currency, and government apparatus for internal and external affairs. Nation-centered
federalism can be compared to Elazar’s model of federalism. In contrast to the nation-centered
federalism approach, Elazar's model of American federalism stresses the importance of the many
different "federal traditions" which make up the political culture of the United States. Specifically,
Elazar identified three kinds of political culture in America: moralistic (emphasizing individual
conscience and collective decision making), individualistic (emphasizing government by law and
due process for individuals), and traditionalistic (emphasizing personal honor and deference to
authority). Thus, instead of viewing American politics as having a single set of values or beliefs
held by all Americans and embodied in our national institutions, Elazar argued that there are many
separate streams that course through our politics (Cecot, 2021). These streams occasionally merge,
but they have not combined into one coherent channel. Elazar's model can be viewed as an
alternative to the more traditional models of nation-centered federalism. In nation-centered
approaches, governance occurs primarily at the national level. This is known as a dual system,
with a tiered organizational structure of central and regional governments, each concerned with
their own spheres of interest. This is what Elazar's model seeks to change (Guillén, 2019). U.S.
federalism is chaotic and imperfect compared to other countries that utilize a dual system, however,
it also has its advantages.
6
While Elazar’s model of federalism is multi-state-centered federalism in which every state
is given a significant role in policy-making. States are considered to be the source of political
powers and are capable of making changes that influence regional as well as national politics. They
control a lot of policy reform, for example, healthcare, education, criminal justice, and so on.
Nation-centered federalism is the opposite of Elazar’s model where the national government has
more power over states and can change policies according to its wish.
Application
While governments all over the world have been consciously moving towards better
management and are trying to bring in the much-needed change to make them efficient, Elazar’s
Federal Model describes the organizational structure of such a government. The design and
structure of a federal state should also encompass the possibility that centralized and decentralized
competencies can be found in the same policy area. There should be polities with jurisdiction over
the same territory, hence the possibility of conflict. However, each polity’s policy output may be
opposed to what another wants to achieve. On the other hand, one or more polities may have
jurisdiction over fewer than a majority of the population. There should be different sources of both
vertical and horizontal legitimacy for each separated polity. Secondly, there will be mutual
recognition by elites. That is, each authority will accept –grudgingly or not– that the other
possesses jurisdiction over its respective areas. The legal system will ensure this actualization and
protect it from undue interference. Partlett (2019) contends that the main objective of any
Government is to provide services to citizens; the faster it can reach and at the less cost, the better
is the quality of services provided, and hence citizen satisfaction increases. Elazar's Federal model
presents three unique feature (Partlett, 2019). First, Elazar emphasized the intellectual rootedness
7
of his federalism studies in the US setting. Second, while he acknowledged that political power
was unevenly distributed between the center and the regions, Elazar contended that the U.S.
Constitution safeguarded equality of rights for all citizens throughout the country. Thirdly, Elazar
saw U.S. federalism as a decentralized system where local government does not have authority
delegated by the state government but rather it has law-making power itself Nation-centered
federalism is concerned with the protection and preservation of identity. In this model which
emphasizes a strong national government, local governments are preserved by the national
government to protect local identity. This model is found in countries such as Great Britain wherein
all citizens of that country have equal status, obligations, and rights regardless of where they live
within England. Domínguez (2021) purports that cooperative federalism on the other hand
emphasizes the interdependence of federal and state governments. This system is dependent on
shared sovereignty between the federal and local governments. At some point, there may be
overlapping responsibilities given to both levels of government resulting in confusion as to who
should provide services and to whom. Traditionally, issues regarding resources, education,
economy/trade, and welfare were placed under the sole jurisdiction of local governments.
The federal government and state governments have different roles in enacting and
enforcing laws, but each government has its own powers. Under the federal system of government,
most legislation is enacted by the national Congress rather than by state legislatures. However, in
many areas, the states and the nation share lawmaking responsibilities. Laurence (2002) theorizes
that the U.S. Constitution reserved to Congress such enumerated (itemized) powers as establishing
a uniform currency and governing interstate commerce, while all other powers were reserved to
the states or to the people (the latter by virtue of the Tenth Amendment) (Laurence, 2002). In
recent years, however, some of those non-enumerated powers have been asserted by Congress in
8
such laws as the Supremacy Clause, which permits legislation necessary for carrying into
execution an enumerated power to preempt states' conflicting laws.
Conclusions
Summarily, Elazar’s model of federalism described the United States as a federation and
highlighted the central role states had in American federalism, even though the judicial branch
ruled that federal power was supreme. Scholars have historically debated why the United States
retains such a strong state government. Historical scholars attribute this to the nation’s
decentralized political culture, and political scientists argue that it is strategic behavior by interest
groups and politicians (Steven, 1992). Other more modern theories of federalism highlight
changes in the policy areas over which government has control. Cooperative federalism refers to
the way the national and state governments work together to solve problems, but the term nation-
centered federalism became popular in recent years because it seems that the federal government
often worked with state governments to create projects (Guillén, 2019). Based on the Elazar's
model of federalism and the difference between cooperative and nation-centered, it is evident that
in a nation that has different people with different cultures, beliefs, interests, and even values living
together, it is imperative to have a good understanding of the various choices of governance
offered. Some of these alternatives include the unitary system, confederation, and the federal
system.
It is clear that the nature of cooperative federalism is unmatched in its applicability to the
modern world. While in the past nation-centered and unit governments were critical to the well-
being of the American citizen, they have given way to a model that allows for greater cooperation
and representation of interests on all sides. As America became more populous and aggressive, it
was inevitable that we would develop our governmental systems to better reflect this need. The
9
United States has actually experienced all of the models in Elazar's theory of federalism. The first
model, Dual Federalism, was mainly founded upon states’ rights and what was to be known as the
separation of powers during the beginning years of our nation. The second model that is applicable
to American history is the concept of Cooperative Federalism which was a collaborative effort
between the state and federal governments to help one another provide for citizens in times of
need. Nation-centered federalism then took place where the federal government called for more
power and control in order to maintain a secure united country.
Appendix
PLCY 804 Literature Review Worksheet—Findings from Original, Empirical Research
1. Topic: A literature review on findings of Elazar’s Federal Model and other competitive federal models
2. Research Question: How does Elazar’s Federal model compare with cooperative federalism and Nation-centered federalism?
3. Database(s) Searched: Google Scholar
4. Keywords Used in Search: Federalism, cooperative, Nation-centered, limitations, Empirical research.
11
Author/Date
Keywords
Findings
Application to Question
Partlett, W/
2019.
Cooperative
Federalism
Criminal law and cooperative federalism take place at
the intersection of two areas of constitutional law that
are among the most closely studied, yet they frequently
aren't paid attention to by policymakers, judges, and
legal scholars.
Young, E.A/
2018.
Cooperative
Federalism
and the USA.
Although federalism is generally understood as a
“sovereign-state system” of cooperative federalism or
competitive federalism, it could be viewed as a state
standing system.
This Article examines whether
“cooperative federalism” is also a
state standing system or, perhaps,
that “competitive federalism”
better integrates state standing
principles than theorists have
previously recognized
12
Stevenson, G/
2019.
Political
community,
Cooperative-
Federalism,
North American federal systems have developed in
different historical and political contexts, which
influence what the constitutional designers believe
federalism could accomplish for the new country.
The journal informs of the factors
contributing to cooperative
federalism in the North America.
Cecot, C/
2021.
Effects,
Federalism
The federal government often brings enforcement
actions legal proceedings to enforce a law against
companies that seem to have violated the law.
It highlights the implications of
Federalism in a state.
Domínguez,
F.C/ 2021.
Cooperative-
Federalism,
Constitutional,
reforms
Nation
centered
Federalism
Federalism may offer a way for governments to ensure
the sovereignty and security of the people, whilst
ensuring that individual freedoms are also respected and
protected. Dominguez argues that by offering more
power to the regional government, it is possible to
ensure that the rights of ethnic minorities and indigenous
groups are protected. Federalism allows these groups to
be on equal terms with their national counterparts,
thereby ensuring all citizens have access to similar
The article analyses
constitutional changes, the
Supreme Court’s role and impact
on devolution in matters of state
and federalism in the United
States.
13
opportunities as well as similar standards of living,
health care and educational systems.
Boudreault, J/
2020.
Cooperative
federalism,
Nation
centered
Federalism,
powers,
application of
powers.
Cooperative federalism has come to be understood as a
system of government characterized by (1) substantive
legislative discrepancies that allow for differences in
governing outcomes across jurisdictions; (2) an
expansive concept of shared jurisdiction meaning that a
large number of legislative matters are within the
competence of both levels of government; (3)
recognition that there is an inherent tension between
maintaining uniformity and national standards while
allowing for diversity and regional variation; and (4) a
relatively high degree of deference to provincial
legislation on the part of courts.
The paper addresses the factors
that affect interstate and intrastate
dynamics in the global
governance process
14
Laurence
Claus/ 2002
Budgetary
Federalism
and United
States of
America.
While the United States of America has historically
participated in fiscal federalism, current issues and
experiences have revealed a pronounced connection to
budgetary federalism. Information collected over the
past fifty years regarding budgetary federalism will be
presented in this essay, along with an explanation of
how federal grants are tied to state budgets, taxes and
education. The findings show that budgetary federalism
is tied to a variety of factors that can be viewed from a
theoretical perspective, as well as pragmatic reality.
The study explored what are the
findings from budgetary
federalism in the USA.
Steven D.
Gold/ 1992
Federal Role
and State
Fiscal Stress
Increase in state fiscal stress affects the poverty rate,
income inequality and finally the public policy. A
greater fiscal stress would lead to greater tax burdens on
those at the bottom of the income ladder and less
spending on programs for poor residents and subsidized
housing.
The study explored the effects of
federalism in a state’s economy
15
Bedi, S/ 2020.
Pluralist
Constitution,
Nation-
centered
federalism
The strength of Nation centered federalism is to regulate
the world and make sure that everyone is treated equally
under nation law.
The paper discusses the strengths
of Nation-centered federalism
Guillén
López/ 2019.
Constitutional
Reform and
Nation
centered
federalism
The author found that basic principles of state structure
and the constitutional mechanisms for securing
independence in the constituent regions and cities would
correspond to those laid down
The paper accesses the
relationship between
Constitutional reforms and
Nation-centered federalism
16
References
Bedi, S., 2020. The Pluralist Constitution is the best place to start if you want to understand contemporary constitutional law or legal
theory, or both.
Boudreault, J., 2020. Flexible and cooperative federalism: distinguishing the two approaches in the interpretation and application of
the division of powers. National Journal of Constitutional Law, 40(1), 1-35.
Cecot, C., 2021. The Federal Enforcement Threat: The Effect of Overfiling Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 18(3), 534-568.
Domínguez, F.C., 2021. We the people: federalism and constitutional reform. International Journal of Human Rights and
Constitutional Studies, 8(1-2), 4-16.
Guillén López, E., 2019. Constitutional Reform and Federalism in Spain. A modest proposal. In Claims for Secession and
Federalism (pp. 509-517). Springer, Cham.
Laurence Claus 2002. Budgetary Federalism in the United States of America. Vol. 50, 581-592
Partlett, W. 2019. Criminal Law and Cooperative Federalism. Am. Crim. L. Rev., 56, 1663.
Steven D. Gold 1992. The Federal Role in State Fiscal Stress. Vol. 22, No. 3, 33-47
Stevenson, G., 2019. The origins of co-operative federalism. In Federalism and Political Community. University of Toronto Press 7-
32.
Young, E.A., 2018. State standing and cooperative federalism. Notre Dame L. Rev., 94, 1893.
17
