Suchergebnisse

The idea of federalism was initially a religious one, applying the idea of a covenant to political organisation. It was from this religious understanding that the modern political understanding of federalism emerged. Some of the critical decisions of the founders of the United States of America were those dealing with the question of religious diversity: in addition to religious ideas of governing by covenant, there was a strong element of separation of church and state, so that no denomination would be favoured over another. In other federal systems, federalism has been used to protect religious diversity in a variety of ways. The period since World War II has been marked by the emergence of new forms of federalism, such as the post‐modern confederation. In many cases the constituent states of these confederal arrangements have had dominant or even established religions of their own differing from those of their associates co‐existing under the religiously neutral framework of the confederation. As the relationship between religion and state continues to undergo re‐evaluation, federalism adds to the range of possibilities for accommodating

Federalism is spreading around the world as a system of government, yet its origins as a political theory remain obscure. Modern federalism was first developed at the end of the eighteenth century. While Kant identified in federalism the value aspect of universal peace, Alexander Hamilton's The Federalist Papers identified its main institutional features, commenting on the new federal American Constitution. This collection offers the first systematic comparison of Kant's and Hamilton's moral and political thought. The essays highlight the similarities and the differences between these two cla

The idea of federalism was initially a religious one, applying the idea of a covenant to political organization. It was from this religious understanding that the modern political understanding of federalism emerged. Some of the critical decisions of the founders of the US were those dealing with the question of religious diversity: in addition to religious ideas of governing by covenant, there was a strong element of separation of church & state, so that no denomination would be favored over another. In other federal systems, federalism has been used to protect religious diversity in a variety of ways. The period since WWII has been marked by the emergence of new forms of federalism, such as the postmodern confederation. In many cases, the constituent states of these confederal arrangements have had dominant or even established religions of their own differing from those of their associates coexisting under the religiously neutral framework of the confederation. As the relationship between religion & state continues to undergo reevaluation, federalism adds to the range of possibilities for accommodating religious diversity. 4 References. Adapted from the source document.

This article reconstructs an overlooked tradition of direct democracy within early twentieth-century Indian political thought. It focuses on four political thinkers—Radhakumud Mookerji (1884–1964), Brajendranath Seal (1864–1938), Radhakamal Mukerjee (1889–1968), and Beni Prasad (1900–1945)—all of whom were central figures in a genre of federalist historiography of premodern Indian politics which emerged in the 1910s. The article interprets these thinkers as critics of the Indian nationalist movement's embrace of electoral government in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Through a contextual reading of their major written works in the late 1910s and the 1920s, the article traces the rise of a distinct theory of federalist constitutionalism, modelled on premodern state structures and oriented towards the legislative empowerment of local citizens' assemblies.

The study analyses the role of federalism in solving the national & ethnic conflicts. From this point of view it describes the main types of modem federal state: mononational (e.g. USA, FRG), multiethnic (Switzerland, present-day Russia) & multinational forms (former socialist federations, present-day Bosnia-Herzegovina). Hereafter the study outlines the most important views which appeared in the modem political thinking about the role of federalism in solving the national & ethnic conflicts. It refers to the messianistic federalist ideologies, to the French republican tradition, & to the American liberal approach. Furthermore it describes the main characteristics of socialist federations, briefly analyses the causes of their disintegration. Finally the study sums up the most important stabilizing factors of ethno-federations. References. Adapted from the source document.

This article, prepared for a symposium at the William and Mary Law School on Constitutional Transformations to be published this fall in the William and Mary Law Review, analyzes the status of federalism under the Obama Administration. At first glance, federalism would seem to have fared poorly under the Obama Administration, given that the Administration's signature achievements to date involve substantial expansions of the federal government's role. But a careful examination of major measures such as health insurance and financial regulation reform, the stimulus, and preemption initiatives demonstrates that the story of federalism's fate under the Obama Administration is not so simple. To be sure, these measures entail some preemption and new, sometimes substantial, state burdens. But each also has brought with it significant regulatory and financial opportunities for the states. Rather than assertions of federal power at the expense of the states, the central dynamic evident under the Obama Administration to date is a move towards more active government, at both the national and state level. States are given significant room to shape their participation in the new federal initiatives, as well as enhanced regulatory authority and expanded resources to do so. States that are eager to play a greater regulatory role and support the new federal policies therefore have much to gain. But states that choose to stay on the sidelines face the prospect of direct federal intervention or loss of access to substantial federal funds, and their ability to pursue their preferred regulatory (or deregulatory) strategies may be curtailed. Put differently, federalism under the Obama Administration is federalism in service of progressive policy, not a general devolution of power and resources to the states – but it can be an important form of federalism nonetheless. Equally significant, the experience so far under the Obama Administration highlights the central importance of the administrative sphere to modern day federalism. Moreover, a particularly interesting feature of the Obama Administration initiatives is their use of administrative structures that not only deeply embed the states in federal program implementation, but also give the states a role in setting the content of federal regulatory standards and even overseeing federal agency performance.

Distribution of power between national and subnational judiciaries is a significant yet often overlooked dimension of American federalism. Jurisdictional overlap between state and federal courts has long generated adminis trative and political tensions that strike at the heart of inter governmental viability. Acute questions of intersystem equi librium arise in the consideration of judicial federalism. The dual court configuration materially affects litigant behavior, judicial policy making, and court administration. Intersystem reconciliation assumes greater importance in light of modern demands of spiraling litigation. This article seeks to raise some of the myriad issues of judicial federalism.

"Antitrust federalism, " or the rule that state regulation is not subject to federal antitrust law, does as much as-and perhaps more than-its constitutional cousin to insulate state regulation from wholesale invalidation by the federal government. For most of the last century, the Court quietly tinkered away with the contours of this federalism, struggling to draw a formal boundary between state action (immune from antitrust suits) and private cartels (not). But with the Court's last three antitrust cases, the tinkering has given way to reformation. What used to be a doctrine with deep roots in constitutional federalism is now a doctrine with close ties to the federal administrative state where courts sit in judgment of an agency's decision-making procedure.The new antitrust federalism conditions antitrust immunity not on the fact of state regulation but on the process of that regulation. Now, only regulation created by a politically accountable process is beyond the reach of federal antitrust suits, exposing vast areas of state regulation to new antitrust scrutiny. This Article argues that the new antitrust federalism is an improvement on the old, both because the old boundary model was unworkable and because the new regime addresses the "inherent capture " problems at the heart of modern state regulation. But this Article also warns that if the Court does not give accountability review real bite, it may have to abandon the new antitrust federalism and opt for a nuclear option that could portend the end of antitrust federalism altogether.

Preface Harold J. Laski; Author's Note; Part One: The History of American Federal Ideas; 1. Development of Federal Ideas before the Eighteenth Century 2. Development of the Ideas of Modern Federalism in the United States of America 3. Ideas of the Federalists 4. The Federalism of Jefferson 5. The Federal Ideas of De Tocqueville 6. Development of Federal Ideas in the United States of America from Kent to Calhoun and Webster 7. Development of Federal Ideas, 1866-1900 8. Bryce's Theory of Federalism 9. Development of American Federal Ideas from the Beginning of the Twentieth Century to the Present Day; Part Two: The History of British Federal Ideas; 1. Development of British Federal Ideas from the Seventeenth Century up to the Present Day 2. Modern Federal Ideas in Great Britain; Part Three: The History of German Federal Ideas; 1. Development of Federal Ideas from Hugo and Pufendorf to Georg Waitz 2. Development of Federal Ideas from Georg Waitz to Max Seydel 3. Development of Federal Ideas from Max Seydel to Siegfried Brie

The study analyses the role of federalism in solving the national and ethnic conflicts. From this point of view it describes the main types of modern federal state: mononational (e.g. USA, FRG), multiethnic (Switzerland, present-day Russia) and multinational forms (former socialist federations, present-day Bosnia-Herzegovina). Hereafter the study outlines the most important views which appeared in the modern political thinking about the role of federalism in solving the national and ethnic conflicts. It refers to the messianistic federalist ideologies, to the French republican tradition, and to the American liberal approach. Furthermore it describes the main characteristics of socialist federations, briefly analyses the causes of their disintegration. Finally the study sums up the most important stabilizing factors of ethno-federations.

"With its ambiguous mix of weak federalist and strong centralist elements, the Austrian constitutional architecture has been subject to conflicting interpretations and claims from its very beginning. The written 1920 constitution has been paralleled by informal rules and forces making up for the imbalance of power between national and subnational authorities. Understanding these inherent weaknesses,
virtually all political actors involved are well aware that reforming the allocation of rights and duties between the different levels in the federal state is urgently needed. In recent years, several initiatives of recalibrating the system of power-sharing between the different levels of government have been initiated. So far progress has been modest, yet the reform process is still underway.
The contributions to this volume shine a light on history, presence, and future aspects of the Austrian federal system from historical, juridical, economic, and political science perspective. The volume is also the first book in English ever devoted to the Austrian version of federalism." - "Die österreichische Verfassung war mit ihrer Mischung aus schwachem Föderalismus und starken zentralistischen Elementen von Anbeginn an Grund für widersprüchliche Interpretationen. Das im Jahr 1920 geschaffene Bundes-Verfassungsgesetz wurde deshalb immer wieder vor allem hinsichtlich der Regelungen über den Bundesstaat und die Verteilung der Aufgaben zwischen Bund und Ländern reformiert. VertreterInnen aller Parlamentsparteien sind sich heute einig darüber, dass eine neuerliche Verfassungsreform erforderlich ist und in den letzten Jahren wurden dementsprechend viele Diskussionen darüber geführt. Ihr Fortschritt ist bislang bescheiden, aber die Reform ist noch lange nicht abgeschlossen. Die Beiträge dieses Bandes werfen aus historischer, juristischer, wirtschaftlicher und politischer Perspektive Licht auf Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft des österreichischen Föderalismus – das erste Mal, dass ein englischsprachiges Buch sich mit diesem Thema auseinander setzt.

"